User talk:Chynapras

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Spike &#39;em (talk) 06:58, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

3RR
Hi. I'm going to assume that you need to be asked to read WP:3RR at this point. Trust me, it'd be a good idea to familiarise yourself with this sort of thing. Then maybe use talk pages a bit more. Thanks. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:57, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring at Babar Azam
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 01:01, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

May 2021
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Imrul Kayes, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. &mdash;  A.A Prinon  Conversation 06:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Tim Seifert
Hi. I've removed the section on his personal life and summarised, using two references from sources I tend to find are more reliable, his COVID issues. The way the section was written was falling foul of WP:RECENTISM and WP:NOTNEWS, amongst other things, and was far too detailed. I'm not sure then in six months time we'll need the reference to COVID at all, but we'll see. Given that it appears other editors tend to agree with me and the note above re: Babar, I'd suggest a long and frank discussion before making any unwise changes might be a good idea. Ta. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Your userpage
Hi Chynapras, I'm Primefac. You'll likely not be pleased about this but I have removed some of your edits because they reveal too much personally identifiable information about you. We have a policy of protecting editors' safety by hiding such information if they share it. I'm really sorry about having to suppress your edits, and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add the information. For some useful information on privacy and safety, you can take a look at Guidance for younger editors and On privacy, confidentiality and discretion. Thank you, and sorry for messing about with your edits! Primefac (talk) 09:54, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with Primefac. Some personal or sensitive information should not be included to protect privacy of users. &mdash;  A.A Prinon  Leave a dialogue 10:23, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Josh Little
Hi. Per WP:BRD, please see this discussion. And please do not add incorrect stats into the infobox, as you did with your last edit. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 18:49, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

List of international cricket centuries at the Sher-e-Bangla National Cricket Stadium
Hi. I request you to share your thoughts at Featured list candidates/List of international cricket centuries at the Sher-e-Bangla National Cricket Stadium/archive1, which I nominated for featured list. If you find no issues in the article from your point of view, then please consider giving a Support. Thank you. &mdash;  A.A Prinon  Leave a dialogue 03:46, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

July 2021
Hi. Stop making personal attacks on me. This is prohibited on Wikipedia and you have to stop it. Otherwise, even if I don't report you, third party admins are always seeing our edits. So, they will block or warn you. Wikipedia is not a battleground that you have to fight with everyone, this may result in your loss of your editing privileges. &mdash;  A.A Prinon  Leave a dialogue 09:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Man, I am not attacking you. You also attacked me. So don’t you think you can also be blocked or warned? There is a saying in Bangla, ‘Nijer dhol pitio na’. By the previous saying, I didn’t attack you. I just wanted to say you that you can also be blocked or warn or even lose editing privileges as you also attacked me. Thanks. Chynapras (talk) 10:01, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Chynapras, if you think that my sentence is attacking, then I have nothing to say. First, you have said, "Such a shame for you that a young editor than you like me is giving you a speech about real vandalism." which is obviously a personal attack. I have just notified you that these are not allowed and suggested to stop. I am neither threatening to block, nor attacked you. I have just replied you politely using no harassing words. But you are saying me "shame", so it obviously seems more attacking. Thanks. &mdash;  A.A Prinon  Leave a dialogue 10:05, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Shame is no attacking work, Mr. Prinon. But it’s a down to earth true that you threatened me that you will get me blocked. If you deny that, I am speechless as well. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 10:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's not attacking. Because there is an appropriate place to report these which is ANI. People report personal attacks there. And if those are really harassing, admins block them. What is exactly wrong in it? I have just said to stop making personal attacks, have I done a great mistake by saying it? Apart from this, I have never said that you don't know vandalism. Generally, it is better not to call those edits vandalism which are done in good faith. So, I just wanted to let you know what vandalism is by reading WP:VANDAL, if you don't have idea. If you know enough about vandalism, then its absolutely fine, you can ignore me. But, making personal attacks are never permittable in any circumstances, even if you are in any content dispute with any editor. &mdash;  A.A Prinon  Leave a dialogue 10:14, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I think I just behaved badly with you. I lost my temper with you cause you reverted my correct edits and put your wrong edits there and top of that, you told me to read about real vandalism. That’s why I lost my temper with you. I mean, man, I am even experienced in fighting vandalism and you are telling me to read about real vandalism. I just want to tell you sorry but I think you also misbehaved with me. Thanks. And sorry if you are hurt 😔. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 10:40, 9 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Firstly, calm down old chap. I came here to mention that the stuff you're trying to insert at Zak Crawley really isn't necessary. The article's fine - we don't need a tonne of detail and precise subheads. You've now been reverted three times on the page so you need to read: WP:3RR - violating that will get you a temp ban and a significant strike.
 * At least one of your reversions also violated WP:CITEVAR. You can't do that. That article doesn't use citation templates. It is not acceptable for your to simply insert them. If you look through the 59 sources in the article, you'll notice that none of them use citation templates. You'll also notice that it uses predominantly high-quality journalistic sources - there are a couple of very local sources from his very early career and I notice a couple of press releases that I might try and find better sources for later on.
 * Lastly, the article isn't long enough for now to require a separate section for international cricket. It might be soon, but it might be better to think about the structure properly. I'm not sure of the best way to take it yet - we'll see when it gets to that stage, possibly after the coming winter if he's still in the England team. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:51, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow-up here. This user seems to think that we are here to insult him only. Despite being a new user, they deny to work collaboratively with everyone. Their recent edits are most flush or very minor, obsession in changing "he" to "surname of the player" in articles and some WP:NOTDIARY edits. Without understanding what we are saying, they are just making personal attacks and reverts. Chynapras, in fact you need to grow some maturity in communicating with editors. Thanks. &mdash;  A.A Prinon  Leave a dialogue 15:41, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

So you, Prinon, is telling me that I do minor edits only? I haven’t made any major edits? You gotta be kidding me. I expanded two section on Mitchell McClenaghan article and expanded one section on Umesh Yadav article. I don’t know why you guys are just arguing so much over the fact that I edit only by myself. You guys are just underestimating me too much. You guys can only see I do minor edits but you guys cannot see that I have made many major edits. I agree that now a days, I am mostly doing minor edits. But you gotta see that I also made many major edits. Man, please stop arguing over the collaboration editing cause I just want to edit myself and if I am wrong anywhere, just tell me and I will rectify my mistake. Thank you. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 17:27, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, a lot of what you're doing is fine. There are articles that desperately need work - I mean, stats on many of them are massively out of date and relatively minor things like that are useful updates. I think I changed one yesterday who had been banned for five years and it still said he was playing for a side. But certainly watch the NOTDIARY stuff - that is a real problem on many articles. Crawley isn't really one of them though - maybe there's a little stuff that might need taking out towards the end of the year to reduce the detail a little, but it's good till then. Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:02, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not saying that your edits are not useful. You have in fact done some good work here. But, some of your edits are NOTDIARY edits, CITEVAR and WP:CRICSTYLE violations. And when we revert those, you again revert back our edits without any understanding or reason. So, I am just suggesting you to be cool minded, review the policies we are citing, and stop fighting with everyone. &mdash;  A.A Prinon  Leave a dialogue 02:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both for finally praising me for my edits. You both have done a great favour. And please just stop ✋ right there, Prinon. This is the end of the matter we have been fighting from yesterday. You go your way and I go my way. Not hoping for another bitter reply. Thank you. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 05:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Warning on Personal Attacks in Edit Summaries
Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. ''Specifically, your request for other editors to identify which country they are from is completely inappropriate. Please review our policies on civility. Wikipedia is inherently collaborative and discussions with other editors is necessary to achieve consensus. We expect a basic level of professionalism when interacting with other editors as we are all just here to build an encyclopedia together.'' Sasquatch t&#0124;c 19:52, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Suppressed information
Hi Chynapras, I have unfortunately had to suppress some of your edits because they reveal too much personally identifiable information about you. We have a policy of protecting editors' safety by hiding such information if they share it. I'm really sorry about having to suppress your edits, and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add the information. For some useful information on privacy and safety, you can take a look at Guidance for younger editors and On privacy, confidentiality and discretion. Thanks, and sorry for messing about with your pages! - TheresNoTime 😺 20:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Talking about Wikipedia
How can I contact you more easily? I need your help! Sheikh Habib Rahman (talk) 13:52, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

You can always contact me here on my talk page. What kind of help do you need from me? Please discuss and I will try my best to help you. Thank you. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 19:25, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Chynapras! What's going on? ➤  Tajwar – thesupermaN!  【Click to Discuss】  19:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

About a help
Hi Chynapras,

Hope you are fine. I wanna make an article based on your school, South Point School and College. Would you like to help me doing this?

Thanks. ➤  Tajwar – thesupermaN!  【Click to Discuss】  08:16, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah. Of course. I would love to help you. Please let me know in which sectors you need help. I will help you in those sectors. Thank you. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 09:26, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Gerhard Erasmus
If you vandalise an article like that again I will make sure you are permanently blocked from Wikipedia. Beeeggs (talk) 12:30, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello
Hello. I've changed my username from 'Tajwar.thesuperman'. Can you remember me? regards, Orbit Wharf  💬•📝 10:21, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Of foresee. I remember you. How are you doing? Hey, I want to ask you a favour. Go to my talk page and go inside the Gerard Erasmus section and see that there is an editor called Beeegs. Tell and warn him that he is vandalising and he shall be blocked if done too much. We both are senior editors and junior editors like him can’t threat us like this. I hope you will make it explain to him properly l. I will also explain it to him. Thanks 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 04:52, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. ''You have already been warned about making personal attacks. This and especially this is completely out of line. You are not more "senior" than the editor you attacked, and their edits are clearly not vandalism. Canvassing other editors to harass another user is completely inappropriate. If you have good reason to think that your edits to Gerhard Erasmus add correct information/revert incorrect information, you need to discuss that at Talk:Gerhard Erasmus, without making any comments about other editors, and without repeatedly reverting back to your preferred version. bonadea'' contributions talk 09:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

About vandalism
Hi Chynapras. Your edit to Gerhard Erasmus was reverted because they thinking that you're vandalizing. But I think that both you and Beeeggs is correct. Erasmus started his international career in 2019 according to ESPN cricinfo. And he started his cricket career in 2011 according to Cricbuzz. But I don't know which year should be used in the years active parameter. I'm not sure. Thanks. regards, Orbit Wharf  💬•📝 13:42, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Guragain ayush
Hi - please can you let me know what your connection with User:Guragain ayush is? Thank you. Girth Summit  (blether) 08:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Why? Why would you want to know that? Is there a particular reason? As far as I remember, I retired the user maybe 5 months back. But why do you want to know that? 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 17:31, 28 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm investigating some behavioural concerns, and I'm trying to understand the connection between your accounts. Again - what is your connection - does the account belong to you? Do you have any others that you haven't declared? Girth Summit  (blether)  07:53, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

No no. That’s not my account. Why would you even think that? That account only does vandalisms. I don’t do that at all. Yes, I agree that I have so behavioural issues but I don’t have any other account than this account (Chynapras). Maybe you are thinking this way cause I wrote 'I am a fool' on his user talk page because I did that for fun as I was a very young, non serious and new user at that time and did that cause I didn’t understand. But when I understood, I removed that and after sometimes, I retired the user. That’s my connection with that account. I don’t have any connections with that account in the present. I hope you understand. Thank you. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 18:27, 29 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for explaining. Please could you explain why you believe you have the authority to 'retire' someone else's account? I'd also be grateful if you could explain which edits of theirs you thought were vandalism, and how you came to notice their editing. Thanks in advance. Girth Summit  (blether)  21:12, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

I didn’t know that one needed authority to retire another user. I thought that if one doesn’t edit for many days, another user retires that user and I retired that editor since he wasn’t editing (but he started editing again now). I am extremely sorry if I made a mistake by retiring that user. I hope you understand why I retired the user. And many of that user’s edits are vandalism and he especially does vandal edits in the Axar Patel article. I came across the editor in the Axar Patel article maybe 6 months ago when I was editing the article and found out that he wrote some vandal things and maybe I reverted those edits or someone else did. But that’s how I came across him and for the answer to your question which edits of that account are vandalism, just check out his editing history and you will find out that he puts unsourced and nonsense things, especially in cricketer’s name section. I hope that I have explained all the things clearly to you and that you have no more questions regarding this 🙂. Thank you. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 06:24, 30 October 2021 (UTC)


 * If the account didn't belong to you, then writing 'I am a fool!' on its userpage was harassment - that is unacceptable, regardless of whether or not you thought they were a vandal. Adding a retired banner to someone else's userpage is also unacceptable, unless they have asked you to do it - lots of accounts stop editing for months or years, and then start again why someone gets interested again or finds they have more time.
 * Now, I want to ask you again how you came to notice this editor. This account has never edited that article, so your explanation above doesn't make any sense, unless you were editing under another account. What was it about this particular editor's account that inspired you to write that on their user page? Thanks. Girth Summit  (blether)  09:31, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry cause I first saw the editor in the Khrievitso Kense article and not in Axar Patel article (that’s where I saw the user for the second time and I got confused about when I first saw the user). I was reading a article about the cricketer that he trialed for Mumbai Indians and then searched him in Wikipedia. I always watch the edit history of a page since it’s my habit. So I checked the edit history on that article as well and saw the user for the first time there. I don’t what I was thinking but I went to that user’s user page to see what kind of editor was he since Lugnuts reverted his edits most probably (I don’t clearly remember since it’s back in February or March) and wrote that thing. You can just check my and that account’s IP address and you will find out that we are different editors. I have nothing to do if you have misunderstandings. I was inexperienced editor at that time and I did it for fun and I am extremely sorry for that. I didn’t understand that it would harass the editor and did it just for fun since I thought that I would never edit Wikipedia seriously. Thank you. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 15:35, 30 October 2021 (UTC)


 * The checkuser tool doesn't work like that I'm afraid - I can't use it to confirm that two accounts are not operated by the same person. To be honest though, it wouldn't have concerned me if you'd said that the account was yours - operating two different accounts is not prohibited by policy, unless you are using them for nefarious purposes such as avoiding scrutiny or to evade blocks. I assumed the account was yours because you put the retired banner on it - if you'd said 'yes, that was my old account, I've stopped using it now' I wouldn't have had any concerns. Now I know that it is not yours, I have to warn you that insulting people like that is unacceptable (as I believe you already understand), and that 'retiring' other accounts is absolutely unacceptable. Girth Summit  (blether)  19:52, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Why would I agree that the other account is mine when in reality, it’s actually not. That’s why I told you the truth. And I already said sorry for insulting and humiliating that other editor. I am saying sorry again and I am wanting forgiveness for retiring that editor without authority. I hope you understand and let’s just end the matter here. You can also discuss the matter with that other editor and that editor will also agree that we are different editors. You can just check our editing style and quality. Anybody will understand we are different editors by seeing our writing and editing quality and style. Thank you. 👉Chynapras👈 (talk) 10:06, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of South Point School and College


The article South Point School and College has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Violates WP:GNG and WP:NOR. No significant coverage in news/media/other sources. References do not establish notability."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:04, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)