User talk:Transformer Auto-Bot

Help request
helped. Hello Administrators. Sir I need your help. I created my first Wikipedia account today because of this Battle of Longewala Article. I have readed Talk:Battle of Longewala Full and now even though User:KnightWarrior25 has been blocked for pushing POV but he explained quite decently there in Talk:Battle of Longewala Last section. And his edit has various merits. And it seems like User:Faizan is Pushing POV, It' doesn't matter at all whether User:KnightWarrior25 has been blocked but he has explained all in the talk page and User:Faizan has not even replied to him till 20days and when he saw him Being Blocked For Pushing WP:POV he just reverted his edits without giving any reason except that one That he is blocked [Https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Longewala&type=revision&diff=669895349&oldid=666750161 this]. I will request Dear Administrators, Any one from you please pay your kind attention towards this. I just saw the User Faizan page and he belongs to Pakistan. So it seems like Nationalism is clouding his judgement. I will request Administrators To Please Revert Changes done by User:Faizan for Pushing POV and for not explaining why he reverted Another User:KW Change nor even in Talk Page he replied. Thank you Administrators For your kind attention and I will hope that you will take steps towards it and will revert edits by User:Faizan on Battle of Longewala Transformer Auto-Bot (talk) 17:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC) Transformer Auto-Bot (talk) 17:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * There are several issues here. First of all, your username violates the username policy because it could be seen to indicate a bot account. You should request a username change or you may be blocked from editing.
 * Secondly, I don't see how "it seems like Nationalism is clouding his judgement" follows from "he belongs to Pakistan". Are you saying all Pakistani editors are biased and unable to edit neutrally? Would the same hold for all Indian editors?
 * Thirdly, the content Faizan restored seems based on reliable (Indian) sources such as the Hindustan Times. Is their judgement clouded, too?
 * So in summary, removal of well-sourced content is not acceptable, and restoration of that content is not POV-pushing. Huon (talk) 17:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Huon okay, I will change my user name by tomorrow.

but you are not getting what I am trying to say - See The Last Section Controversy Section should be added in the Battle of Longewala @ Talk:Battle of Longewala, As per as Talk Page. Version by User:KnightWarrior25 was good as neutral view as he mentioned sources. Firstly The Article Battle of Longewala seems to be edited by a biased editor and no one paid attention when he edited.

as per as talk, KW was right because of following reasons -


 * It was mentioned in Info-box By User:Faizan that - Casualties and losses - Pakistan - 200 soldiers killed(In air-strikes) Since the reference mentioned Page 96 does not support this word In Air strikes this was what KW has wrote on talk, And I say User Faizan was pushing POV because of this only. See edit history of Battle of Longewala


 * I said this article was vandalised or WP:POV by a user And when he edited, no one paid attention to his edit. I am saying this because after reading The Talk:Battle of Longewala Sourced from World Heritage Encyclopedia™ licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 This reference Gives a view of Wikipedia:Longewala Article about what few months earlier wiki article was.

once visit it Sir ..

Have a look on the info box there is written 200 Soldiers killed with Citation Needed (Reference has been provided though so no problem here). Point to be noted here is that after Decisive Indian Victory there is nothing written about controversy as the controversy section is included in the Aftermath. Look at the aftermath, At the last para, The Controversy part is mentioned - " In 2008, there was some controversy surrounding the role of the army and the air force in the battle. Maj-Gen Atma Singh (who was awarded Vir Chakra for his actions during the battle), Air Marshal Mohinder Singh Bawa and eight others claimed that there was no ground battle fought at Longewala and the Indian air power was responsible for Pakistan's defeat. Kuldip Singh Chandpuri sued the air force officers disputing the official version of the battle for one rupee, and stated that the limelight given to him had caused them "heartburn".

'''this is the reason why I am saying that User:Faizan Edit should be reverted sir as this clearly gives a view and thus User:KnightWarrior25 edits were right. See the edit history of Longewala article sir.'''


 * And the last point which you said about.

sir I'm not against of this, All the Sources Hindustan Times etc have been mentioned on the aftermath as per this and the major who's been awarded with the India's 2nd Highest Military's Gallantry Award has already cleared this controversy's these are mentioned on all these sources Hindustan times etc.......... THAT'S WHY I AM SAYING, SIR REVERT EDIT BY USER:FAIZAL Thanks for your kind attention!! Transformer Auto-Bot (talk) 18:42, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Someone please help! Dear Administrators, sir please help me. See me Help request below, I have requested but no one has replied Transformer Auto-Bot (talk) 05:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi. You are correct that page 96 does not say air strikes, however page 95 makes this clear.  I should point out that "http://www.comicbooklibrary.org/articles/battle_of_longewala" is a copy of  "World Heritage Encyclopedia" which is a copy of our (Wikipedia's) article, and has no value as a reference.
 * If you return to editing Wikipedia you need to focus on keeping comments to the point, not attacking other editors, especially for their nationality, and if you want to work on disputed topics like this, get a good understanding of our sourcing requirements. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC).


 * You should, however, not return except with your original account. Sockpuppetry damages your credibility and, by extension, your cause's. Huon (talk) 14:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)