Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Aam Aadmi Party

Aam Aadmi Party


19 July 2013

Have you discussed this on a talk page?

Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.

Location of dispute Users involved Dispute overview

There is bitter conflict going on between my edits and his reverts. the user:Sitush seems to be aganst all my edits and does not ever seems to be supportive. many of my hard worked contributions are being deleted and I am being declared as biased Aam Aadmi Party supporter who is using wikipedia as a political broadcast base, which I am not. Even worthy incidents are being deleted. Instead of helping to improve articles, the user seems to misuse his powers and dispite repeated persuation, seems to aganst the very Article's right to be complete and worthy of being feature. Please Intervene into situation or else Wikipedia might loose many enthusiastic contributors.

I can only contribute to topics which I know and if i know about Aam Aadmi Party, then I would only contribute there. Please look at my contributions and the other user's contributions in this regard and resolve the dispute.

Have you tried to resolve this previously?

Extensively Used Talk pages. Haven't reverted his reverts. Have tried my best to follow all the WPs which have been brought to my notice And completely tried to understan the other user's point of view.

How do you think we can help?

Review both our edits and the manner in which we used our language in talk pages and edit comments. Then resolve the matter so that I can positively contribute the wikipedia and topics of my interest from completely neutral point of view.

Opening comments by Sitush
Please limit to 2000 characters - longer statements may be deleted in their entirety or asked to be shortened. This is so a volunteer can review the dispute in a timely manner. Thanks. has reverted edits by the complainant,so too has here. is among those who have expressed opinions contrary to the complainant on the article talk page. Tall.kanna has spread discussion far and wide - article talk, my talk, Binksternet's, Qwyrxian's etc - and more often than not they've come to realise the correctness of what they are being told, an example of which is this thread. They're getting frustrated, I understand that, but they've become virtually a single-purpose account after a lengthy absence from Wikipedia and the best thing they could do here is spread out a bit and/or take up genuine offers of explanation rather than going around like a bull in a china shop. I've said that they seem to have a large investment in AAP-related articles: the presumption would be that they are one of the many supporters of this almost-messianic movement but I don't think I've ever said that they are biassed, merely that not putting all their on-wiki efforts into one thing might be more rewarding in the long run. I am not the only one who has tried to explain how things are done but there is a limit of tolerance and the problems that have occurred have been both numerous and wide-ranging. - Sitush (talk) 21:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
Please do not use this for discussing the dispute prior to a volunteer opening the thread for comments - continue discussing the issues on the article talk page if necessary.

Welcome to the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Though I am a regular volunteer here, I am neither "taking" nor opening this case for discussion at this time. I would like to comment, however:  It is a bit unfair to say "Just take a look at all my and another editor's edits, figure out which ones are in dispute, and help me with them." Because of that, you may find that no volunteer — and we're all volunteers here — is going to be willing to go to the effort to take this case. Let me suggest that you supplement your "Dispute overview" overview with a specific list of edits which have been thoroughly discussed between you and the other editor and which have stalled out. If possible, provide diffs as well. Regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 21:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I have been cooperating with the other user in many instances such as santosh koli section in [] and [talk:Sitush] but without understanding my point or explaining properly, the other user takes everything personal.
 * Take for example Delhi state assembly elections, 2013 page, its history and talks regarding it above in form of Delhi/need clarification subheading. I worked hard creating a table, which with one click our friend reverted. Then also removed "AAP as main contender" from it suspecting it to be biased. I never reverted them, as I too agreed to his/her objections. then I added AAP as a Spoiler effect party, which again he removed. But this time It was well sourced and Valid Edit. And failed to give sufficient explaination above on [talk:Sitush] page. - Tall.kanna (talk) 21:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Conflict 1-Delhi state assembly elections, 2013 Page. It is a very new and simple example to understand the conflict. Its history clearly show how brutally he attacks others. And without discussing anything on its talk page he/she reverts every edit showing prjudice towards AAP. -Tall.kanna (talk) 21:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll Stop this Dispute for Once and leave the Page for some time. But next time I shall come with full preparation with Wikipedia Policies as a support. This is my last closing dispute dialog.(no more comments please)-Tall.kanna (talk) 22:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)