User talk:117.194.234.157

January 2020
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Tipu Sultan. 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 page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges. 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 result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:36, 13 January 2020 (UTC)  (Replying to above message (posting what I did in my last edit summary on the concerned article)

Please see what my edit was. I undid this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tipu_Sultan&diff=934589840&oldid=934469365 which undid an earlier edit. I removed pure claims (lies I know for a fact) passed off as facts here. We can discuss if its a matter of discussion POV. There is nothing to discuss here. Fact is that those "facts" are untrue and have no reference. Whoever finds any ref can always add this material back with the refs right?
 * I don't care to get in to merits of the dispute, as that's not what this is about. The main point here is that you are not allowed to edit war to preserve what you feel is the correct version of an article. You should instead collaborate with other editors to achieve a consensus, and if that fails, use dispute resolution.  If you continue to edit war, you will be blocked. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 13 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Adding further I would like to reiterate that I was not pushing any POV whatsoever. There are many absurd claims about this person whose family were servants for generations of the royal family from whom they (his father and then him) kind of usurped power by being de-facto rulers. They were never royalty nor "captured" the kingdom they were servants in hitherto. If it was POV I would not have done anything. As an example, the genocide of the Native-Americans and First-Nation-People and the Aboriginal Tribes and the Maoris in North-America and Oceania, who were the rightful owners of those lands by illegal immigrants (so-called settlers) from Europe (who eventually theft of their lands) is without a shade of doubt *fact*. *POV* would be how many of them were killed. I removed a few claims (lies) NONE of which are substantiated. I know for a fact they are wrong. Even if they are right indeed why not the editor concerned put in the scholarly and honest citations and the material which will always be available in the revision-history??? Instead of their lying there for years on end unreferenced??? How can WIKI be a reliable encyclopedia then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.234.157 (talk)
 * As I said, this is not about the merits of your claims, but your actions. Please make a case on the article talk page to discuss with other editors.  I would suggest toning down your attitude and approaching the subject calmly; calling everything "lies" does not help your case. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 13 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I logged off the Net for a while so my IP may have moved. A final query then. Is adding any "claim" (as in this page) mysteriously unreferenced fine? Even if a medium-sized article might have over a score of such assertions? Only removing it counts as edit-warring??? I see the wrong version was restored (revert of my edit) on Jan 07th with many "citation needed" tags. In fact EVERY revert of my edits has a CN tag to it (which proves my removals were likely legit). Also how long do I wait for adequate references to appear then (from Jan 07th)? I know for a fact they will never appear. And I do not have the scope or time to discuss on Talk. And anyway this is about Facts not POV. So I would rather wait. Meantime could you at least as an Admin tag the page for lacking in adequate good citations? Also I am not saying everything on that page is a lie. Only those I removed. And I did not even remove all of the falsities on there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.231.193 (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If you don't have the time to discuss it on talk, then you don't have time to edit war, either. You can start a discussion right now requesting that the CN tagged information be removed. 331dot (talk) 11:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)