User talk:Frank Springer

Welcome!

Hello, Frank Springer!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~), be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Rajput resistance to Muslim conquests. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Venkat TL (talk) 08:28, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will reply about it on the talk page of article. Frank Springer (talk) 03:46, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Venkat TL (talk) 08:28, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pakistani cricket team in the West Indies in 1987–88, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgetown. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General 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 South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose discretionary sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the 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.

Venkat TL (talk) 13:49, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: You already add these sactions on my talk page here Special:MobileDiff/1076086284 While I respect the policies but I don't think this is really that important to keep posting it here and made this page grubby which I really don't like. Frank Springer (talk) 17:35, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They are not the same. It means you have neither read the message, nor clicked the links it had. Venkat TL (talk) 18:28, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello, I'm Venkat TL. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Rajput resistance to Muslim conquests that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Venkat TL (talk) 10:39, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: I found it hard to believe where I was not civil in that reply as a matter of fact, I asked in a very polite ton at the end (which all editors there are trying to do in case of your POV claim) to mention about the lost battles which we missed. Don't know how that was not very civil. Frank Springer (talk) 11:20, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Rajput resistance to Muslim conquests. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. namecalling is not allowed. If you do this a third time, you will be reported to admins for disciplinary actions. Venkat TL (talk) 11:24, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: I don't know how this is namecalling in a wrong sense. I simply requested you to add the problems which that article had in it but you accused me of personal attack & loosing cool. Is these because, You can't answer my questions or you are loosing this debate ? Quite probably this is the case. Frank Springer (talk) 11:38, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would you Say that comment to your seniors or boss or teachers? Do I need to tell you what is civil or what is not. If you dont understand then you should stay away from editing articles that are under discretionary sanctions. Looking at your edit summary, you understand this very well. You have been warned twice. There wont be a third warning. Venkat TL (talk) 11:47, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: What was wrong in it ?? I still requests you again to join that talk page, explain the POV issues so we can work on it and resolve it, That's it. Your earlier remarks was that it mentioned them in positive light and depict them as winner of every battle which isn't quite true it mentions their defeat in great detail. Once again If it missed any historical defeat of Rajputs, you are welcomed to let us know about it. You are not my teacher or boss. We are unknown random users who edit this enclyopedia in area of our speciliaty. Thanks. Frank Springer (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I may not be your teacher or boss, but that does not mean you will resort to name calling and denigration of fellow editors. I have already said enough, I am waiting for other article contributors to comment. They have been pinged already. Venkat TL (talk) 12:04, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: Where I wrongly criticised you ?? I just said since you added that template on the particular page it's your responsiblity to answer our objections with nuance. If you don't we can assume your silence as consensus. I didn't resort to name calling in a wrong sense but asked your concern about it. I think you are resorting to poor tactics of undoing my genuine edits with scholarly sources. Even I had enough. Thanks. Frank Springer (talk) 12:14, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been asked to stop namecalling. If you insist on namecalling, you will be reported. You can then explain your namecalling to an admin in your unblock notices. Or you can move forward and not repeat what has happened. Choose one. Venkat TL (talk) 12:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: I searched on google that what exactly is namecalling thing and I found a answer that abusive language or insults. I fail to find out where I abused you or insuled you. In these revision you refered is, I said your inability to reply exact issue with article will lead to consensus because of your silence. Please, what is abusive in these ?? You are doing all sort of things to get me blocked as you can not debate with facts and figures ? Never a good thing. Bye. Frank Springer (talk) 13:20, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please spend some time in reading Wikipedia:Civility. Venkat TL (talk) 13:23, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: I will but once my M.B.B.S semester exams will be over. These time they will be in offline mode 😥😥. Frank Springer (talk) 13:31, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Frank Springer! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Paramara dynasty several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Paramara dynasty, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Venkat TL (talk) 12:01, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Paramara dynasty. 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. Venkat TL (talk) 11:43, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: I did use the talk page where you being primary and only opposer failed to contest my addition with facts and figures again. Just bombarding my talk page with warnings won't change the fact that you are yet to answer our concerns and your assertions for claiming Rajput resistance to Muslim conquests as POV article with that template. Hurry up join that discussion there as well. Frank Springer (talk) 11:51, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

you have made a proposal, that has not been approved. You have no rights to push your preferred version of the article without consensus. Please self revert and follow WP:DR. Venkat TL (talk) 11:55, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: Firstly you were the chief opposer in both those articles and it's you who failed to debate responsibly with sources that unambiguously contrasted our addition. I never pushed my version in any of those articles instead started discussion and asked your concern (as you were only one who opposed my addition) and you simply stop discussing while editing other article. Frank Springer (talk) 12:01, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of international cricket centuries by Sachin Tendulkar. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

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. Thank you. Venkat TL (talk) 12:04, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: How adding a short description Wikipedia list article in a article which consists of list of centuries of a cricketer is disruptive ? Are you just stalking my contributions and reverting them ? Frank Springer (talk) 12:07, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:SDNONE Venkat TL (talk) 12:09, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: Well, I think just adding that this is article list of Wikipedia won't breach this law but in all fairness this is not a issue to get engaged in a edit war or back & forth reversals. Thanks. Frank Springer (talk) 12:14, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Abecedare (talk) 20:33, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]