User talk:Harprit

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use 	 ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Five pillars, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not, How to write a great article

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at New user log.

-- utcursch | talk to me


 * Zora (Talk / Contributions)
 * kwamikagami (Talk / Contributions)

Your removal of another user's barnstar
Hi, I reverted your change on Zora's page, where you removed his/her barnstar, saying "stripped Zora of her barnstar due to her edit warring and hatred for other users". I think it's pretty bad practice to remove barnstars from others, especially ones that were not awarded by yourself. If you have a problem with another user, just use their talkpage to say so. If things get really bad, use WP:RFC. But removing a barnstar is not the way to go... --JoanneB 06:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Woah man, you can't strip people's barnstars from them... that's vandalism so I wouldn't do that again. It was funny though. gren グレン 07:50, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, Harprit, it is vandalism, and this isn't the first time you've done this. If you have an issue with someone mistreating you, then I'll be happy to look into it, but if you do this again, you'll be blocked. kwami 08:07, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Someone needs to read their administrator manual. Kwamikagami is not allowed to aid his friends in harassing and threatening other users.  You said on your page: "I'll block him. I'll be only too happy to" and now threaten on my page.  This is very dangerous for you as you just entered the administrator scene.  Zora is a user that violates anything she doesn't see fit, as an admin you are not suppose to support this behavior and i don't think it is a good idea to keep those kinds of contacts.  (tip: don't get too involved in war users such as zora).  I recently saw what she's been doing on pages upon returning from my hiatus.  She blames me for the mistakes of others and defames my name.  This shouldn't be tolerated.  I didn't even know that removing a nobility award from an ignoble is vandalism, but you threatened me upon request of another user.  I would not like to be the reason behind your dethroning, please leave me be.--HaRpRiT


 * Zora is not my friend, and she did not request me to take action against you. (I warned you against vandalism first, and told her about it when she later responded to an attempt of mine at conflict resolution. My warning to you was however delayed due to an edit conflict with Gren.) You already have a history of harassment. If you are a vandal, you will be blocked, period. kwami 09:21, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Harprit, users over time at wikipedia begin to know each other and know the type of edits another makes and what to expect from them. Such has happened with Zora and I and I have come to beleive that she is quite a good editor, and while we don't always agree I admire her perseverence and willingness to create rewrites when I would have just reverted admirable.  Since our interests are similar she will often talk to me about issues on these pages as I will to her.  My point is that you aid people when you think they're right.  Kwami is certainly allowed to agree with Zora and if he deems your edits to be vandalism he can block you, or at least request that another admin do so.  Your work on Islam and flat-earth theories completely botched the page making it a defense of Islam.  This is not NPOV, nor is it encyclopedic.  The page may need some help but talk about it and don't just mangle the page.  I have found your edits on many other pages to similar although not always as drastic.  Please refrain from being so confrontational as it will not serve you well and have a talk on articles that have been established such as Salafi, Islam and clothing and Wahhabism.  I seriously recommend you read WP:NPOV because while none of us are perfect on adhering to this policy I feel that your edits are far more off than Zora's.  Thanks for your time. gren グレン 09:28, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Harprit, to say Zora's commentary holds no basis is silly. There is a difference of opinion between you two.  Please work it out as a mature user while following wikipedia policies. gren グレン 19:44, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Saeed
The word "Saeed" is of Farsi origin. I've verified this from several sources. If you can find a source that claims "Saeed" is of Arabic origin, please show me. Zain 07:08, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Zora and her false claims
Mostly what she claims is a bunch of lies, I hadn't vandalized anything i just stripped her of a barnstar because of her name-calling and childish behavior then somebody told me I wasn't allowed to do that. She's had a vendetta, if you take a look at her contributions for the last couple of weeks, you can see that she has been going to pages that I could really care less about and Defaming my name "Harprit Attack!!". The worse thing about her is that when she's busy playing the role of WikiGod, whatever is against what she prefers she started pleading for help on talk pages. "please revert war him" "please hold my fort" and so on. HaRpRiT

Bollywood
Hi Harprit, just noticed your edits on the above and your message on WP:INWNB. I know of Zora as someone who has fought vandals, mostly linkspam and other juvenile stuff on articles such as Aishwarya Rai. There may be merit in what you say about her targetting you; however, people typically go by the overall record of a person as well. For you to make others understand your viewpoint, you would need to understand some conventions of Wikipedia and adhere to them religiously; one of them is about the barnstar. As you seem to have realised that it is wrong to remove it, please do not say "I just removed a barnstar." It isn't considered wikiquette. Another rule is the WP:3RR about which you may be aware of now. Another convention is that, when you append a NPOV tag, you do not make changes at the same time - this may cause confusion to someone who visits the page (he may think that the changed text is NPOV! - as we rarely look at the edit history). Also, whenever one appends a NPOV tag, he should also discuss it on the talk page. I hope that you would consider either reverting your edit yourself or remove the NPOV tag or remove the changes but retain the NPOV tag, with a discussion on the talkpage. Pl. do it asap or someone else may be doing it. Thanks for your time --Gurubrahma 10:19, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Harprit, please read the talk page before changing (and especially reverting) the article. Particularly the last section which is a discussion of the disputed sections. --Mairi 03:47, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Removing posts
I'm curious, why did you remove the post from your talk page. Its considered *rude* to remove such posts. Your attitute leaves much to be desired, I'm afraid. In wikipedia, the more polite you are, the more people will respect you. Unfortunately, I see you're heading the wrong way, and if you continue with this you will be blocked and your new accounts can be tracked down and blocked too. I hope you will apologise to Zora, and vice-versa, and be friends and discuss things in a proper manner. We want a good editor, but above all we need a polite person. =Nichalp  «Talk»=  19:14, 18 October 2005 (UTC)


 * all of them were dealing with the same thing, I just responded to them all at once. Zora had been spreading some lies about me and things i didn't do, I felt that messages regarding her lies shouldn't be kept on my talk page.  My talk page is left to my discretion and if I feel that something is on there that is incorrect or has been posted by people without their knowing the full story, then it shouldn't be kept there. Thanks.---HaRpRiT


 * To "lie" means to intentionally tell something that is not true. If the teller believes it's true, it's not a lie. It seems Zora believes the things she's been saying about you, which means that she has not been telling lies. If what she's said isn't true, it would be more constructive to discuss it with her. Calling her names just makes you look bad. kwami 06:44, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Unexplained reverts
You have reverted my/our Sunni Islam change 3 times without explanation. Maybe there is something wrong with it, but if you won't explain it we can't guess what might be wrong. Please read Revert. Art LaPella 01:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Harprit, since you continue to engage in antisocial behavior, I have restored several of the articles you reverted without reading the contents. I really don't care which version is correct; 'right' isn't the issue. The issue is that you refuse to participate in the community, and won't engage in dialogue to achieve concensus. When people point out that you've made spelling or punctuation errors, and still you insist on maintaining your version, you arouse the suspicion that you are only here to pick fights. kwami 01:19, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

no kagami, I support my changes and understand what I write. If you wish to engage in tagteam edit wars, you deserve to reprimanded. If spelling errors are found THEn fix them. Don't pick fights with me--Harprit 07:11, 23 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I have never seen you once support anything. Where is all this evidence and proof you keep claiming? It's not enough to understand what you write, you need to make us understand what you write too. Without that, all you work will be considered little more than a nuissance. If you continue to engage in trivial edit wars, I will look into ways of having you blocked. If you wish to contribute, then please contribute. If you don't wish to contribute, then you're wasting our time. kwami 07:49, 23 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I was puzzled by "I support my changes", at least on the Sunni Islam site I've studied. Here is the complete text of your support for your changes I found in your edit summaries and on the talk page: "

". Art LaPella 20:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Request
Hi. Please don't help on the Hindustani page, your contacts are joining and it is becoming a mess. Kwami had added some 2 or 3 paragraphs a few days back that have no basis; his source is old and bigotted. Nobody else realizes it because their busy in revenge editting against you. So, please don't edit on that; Thank you.--JusticeLaw 18:28, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

block
You have been blocked for 24 hours for intentionally adding errors to the Bollywood article. kwami 08:38, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to have to refer this to high administrators, there were no intentional errors i was aware of. You should read your rules before you do things like that. It's abusing your privelages.---HaRpRiT


 * Come on Harprit, you bragged about it. kwami 05:48, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

No, "spelling mistakes added" means I fixed the ones on there. And you're not allowed to block users on articles you are currently involved in editting. Also note here the spelling mistakes you think I introduced, because i'm going to have them take a look at it--Harprit 05:51, 25 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I have never contributed to that article, so I have no personal stake in it. I know nothing about the subject. This is about acceptable behaviour and following Witiquette, not about POV. kwami 08:41, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Violations of 3RR Possible Repeat Vandalism
I'm not sure, but I think your edit warring on Sikh may violate the 3RR rule. However, one would have to go look and see for oneself. Perhaps a longer block may be necessary. &mdash; Rickyrab | Talk 12:14, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * While the edit warring does not technically violate 3RR (because it's spread out so that only a couple of reverts occur daily), it violates the spirit of 3RR (by repeatedly favouring the same edit over and over again without coming to a compromise or even seeking to). In addition, I feel you may be acting in a vandalish manner and insisting on making vandalism stick.   &mdash; Rickyrab | Talk 12:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, Harprit! Thank you for your contributions. I am Muazim Balwan and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Questions or type at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Muazim Balwan (talk) 09:38, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community