User talk:Icommoner

Kattabomman
Hi, this was the source from which I added content that you reverted. Is there any wrong statement in it? Kailash29792 (talk) 04:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, the article should be written within the polices such as Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research and your contents does not met these polices. Your whole contents are against the polices. You asked for reasons, already i provide basic reason on your talk page about why I reverted your edits (Adding original research). I give some example from your contents as follows which violates polices.
 * In 2011, Veerapandiya Kattabomman faced severe criticism because of its historical inaccuracies, along with two other films – Parthiban Kanavu and 7aum Arivu. (original research)
 * Tamil film historian S. Theodore Baskaran said "Celebrated historical movies like Veerapandiya Kattabomman and Parthiban Kanavu have been unfaithful to history. Kattabomman was not even a king. His arsenal had just about three to four guns. All this is well-documented, but the film showed just the opposite.”[16] (non verifiable)(original research)(The quoted article actually did not talk about Kattabomman and does not contain supported documents to prove Baskaran's view) Icommoner (talk) 05:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I reverted your removal since you have not given any valid reason for the revert. You say Adding unreferenced controversial information and Adding original research, including unpublished syntheses of sources), but the addition had a referenced, was a quote (not original research), and was based on the source provided (not a synthesis). Please review the policies you are referencing since you pretty clearly do not understand them; you may also want to review WP:ROWN. VQuakr (talk) 07:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The quoted sentence in the article is completely false and maligning. Kattabomman was a 47th King (Kurunila Mannan, Polygar) of Panchalankurichi of Tamil Nadu and the movie was right. The Indian government has built the memorial and honored him. This clearly proves that the quote is untrue and what i did was right. The quoted sentence in the article is unverified and it's the author's original research. I will revert back and if you want anymore information, i'm glad to prove it!

March 2014
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Veerapandiya Kattabomman (film). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.''I have reverted your repeated removal of sourced content. If you believe the source provided is not accurate, please tag the statement and discuss on the article talk page. I can assist you with this if you would like help. Reversion and inaccurate claims of "original research" are not acceptable.'' VQuakr (talk) 05:26, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.