User talk:117.205.193.212

September 2019
Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to Mathura, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Lupin VII (talk) 10:14, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
 * I do not own articles but that does not stop me from defending my constructive edits which are being constantly reverted by a single person with no proper explanation or vague excuses. Aren't we supposed to be neutral on wikipedia? 117.205.193.212 (talk) 10:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC)


 * That's why you're purposely ignoring all edit summaries? Lupin VII (talk) 10:22, 11 September 2019 (UTC)


 * What edit summaries where I am constantly accused of POV? When I just converted a listing into paragraph and referenced it? The edit summaries are vague with no response to my NOTADIRECTORY rule question being ignored constantly. So am I to blame? When I am providing full reason for my edits? I thought wikipedia was neutral where every person was free to constructive edit a page when seeing the page history one can clearly see a single person making a MONOPOLY on the page with everyone's edit constructive or not being constantly reverted. Is this wikipedia all about? 117.205.193.212 (talk) 10:35, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You're misconstruing again. You said that you were being reverted, with no/inadequate explanations. This is not the case, if you care to actually read the edit summaries. Your entire attitude reeks of ownership issues. I have no issue bringing this up in WP:ANI should you continue to display the same behavior. Lupin VII (talk) 10:43, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Are blaming me for POV edits an "adequate explanation"? When my paragraph conversion to listing and NOTADIRECTORY question in my edit summaries gets unanswered? I am providing edit summary for my edits each time with constructive data. Claiming my attitude reeks of ownership when I am just exercising my right to help constructive edits don't get vandalized on wikipedia is enough to condemn me? 117.205.193.212 (talk) 11:08, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Please do not assume ownership of articles as you did at Mathura. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. Lupin VII (talk) 10:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree with User:Lupin VII. On top of that you didn't convert the list into a paragraph, you added an entry with unsourced content in it. The link provided by you didn't say anything about the number of pilgrims or that specific temple complex being the most important, which makes it an original research. Secondly, you deleted CS templates and removed CS parameters, making the sourced 'bare'. - Fylindfotberserk (talk)
 * Obviously it's not my job to convert and reference entire section so I started with one temple. The reference clearly states that devotees throng in large numbers so you could have removed my millions and replaced with with many and you seem to have forcefully removed the Janmashtami celebration data which the reference clearly states. So blaming me for original redearch is biased. 117.205.193.212 (talk) 11:08, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

10:49, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.