User talk:Goshua55

Welcome!

Hi Goshua55! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! OnlyNano^talk 03:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hi Goshua55! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of an article 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, 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. SKAG123 (talk) 18:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

sure,

ill be debunking the present horrible version line-by-line as i did spend considerable time studying that. Goshua55 (talk) 18:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hey i wrote a thread there on the talk page there refuting the old hagiography and its claims,

and i explained why the new version is better, and backed by solid academic sources. Goshua55 (talk) 20:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history 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; read about 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.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hello Ponyo,

i wrote a long refutation thread on why the old version of the page was full of myths and manipulated information,

i did want to create a dispute myself but i couldnt as it asked me to choose if others responsed and talked it out on the talk page, but the others didnt talk and reverted it without interacting with the talk page titled "a refutation of the myths about ustad ahmad lahori's role as the chief architect of shahjahan and the nature of his work as described in his old wikipedia" on Talk:Ustad Ahmad Lahori

if you got any advice on how to make them read it and help create a better page without misleading lies it would help a lot. Goshua55 (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Going to the talk page and explaining your edits is correct, but continuing to restore your preferred version while discussion is ongoing is not and will lead to a block if it continues. Please continue to engage with others on the talk page to find consensus for the changes you are making and follow dispute resolution if no progress is made on the talk page.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

trust me, i dont want to keep doing it myself too but that version is so bad that i had to in the past,

im trying to be patient as you suggested,

but it would mean a lot if you could look into it too as its blatant pseudo-history. and i researched and explained well with some effort . Goshua55 (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Taj Mahal. — Benison (Beni · talk) 01:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

but i sourced it to ebba koch's work?

the ustad lahori attribution is pseduo-history and it doesnt match any official sources, and it comes from his own son.

theres a pretty in-depth refutation of that myth on the talk page Talk:Ustad Ahmad Lahori Goshua55 (talk) 13:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i have created a talk on the taj mahal page, discuss there. Goshua55 (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Goshua55, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! — Benison (Beni · talk) 16:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]