User talk:Xavidesh
Welcome Xavidesh!
I'm S0091, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
| To help get you started, you may find these useful: | When editing, follow the 3 Core Content Policies:
|
Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the 
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.
November 2020
[edit]
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Sarasvati River, 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. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:47, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
Michel Danino is definitely not WP:RS; Wikipedia is not to be used for the promotion of WP:FRINGE theories, such as Indigenous Aryans. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:49, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Joshua Jonathan: Calling a translated hymn of Rigveda a POV pushing? Should we have a Wikipedia committee to review your decision? You seen to be pushing your personal POV where you seem to be deciding what can be added to the article and what cannot be. Restore my revision of Rigveda or I will ask the Wikipedia committee to review your claims of POV pushing.--Xavidesh (talk) 02:52, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- 21 edits, and already referring to "the Wikipedia committee"? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:07, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Joshua Jonathan: So many edits from you. Still pushing your POV? and indulging in pushing only one sided point of you and FALSE fabricated theories such as Samudra was not an ocean? DO what show me one single reference from entire Four Vedas or any Vedic text that refers to Samudra as anything but the ocean. There are more than 100 specific references in Rigveda alone where Samudra is Ocean and nothing else. You can see even T.H.Grifith called it Ocean in the translation which you repeatedly deleted. Don't forget to show a reference within in Rigveda which refers to Samudra as anything else but Ocean. --Xavidesh (talk) 06:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Rigveda. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Doug Weller talk 06:28, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: Attack how? Please explain.--Xavidesh (talk) 06:29, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: You will block me after deleting my contribution to the pages about adding the Rigveda hymns? which your friend Joshua has deleted already. How come adding a referenced translated hymn by T.H.Griffith is against wikipedia policy? There is not a single place in Saraswati River page where that hymn is mentioned about the Saraswati river flowing from mountain to the ocean.? There is no repetition occurring on the page either.--Xavidesh (talk) 06:32, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Wow. You don't recognise your attacks? That's very worrying. Read WP:CIVIL and WP:AgF. Continue and I'll report you to WP:ANI. I didn't say I'd block you. Someone else might though. And read WP:NOR - your accompanying text had your own observations. I didn't say anything about repetitions. Doug Weller talk 06:36, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- WOW please go to Saraswati river talk page and answer why my Rigvedic hymns were removed siting repetition when there was no such repetition occurring. Do not attack a new editor.--Xavidesh (talk) 06:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: Attack how? Please explain.--Xavidesh (talk) 06:29, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
DS-alert
[edit]
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.