User talk:AbhijnanGhosh87

Welcome!

Hello, AbhijnanGhosh87, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Pbritti (talk) 05:03, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank u AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 06:08, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. ~~~~ S Philbrick (Talk) 15:06, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ossi kotov

requesting a ban on the user ossi kotov as this bot account is continuously changing the no of rafale in the indian air force requesting a reversal of his edit also and also a change in the no of rafale in the indian air force back to 36 2409:40F3:2C:A1BD:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 16:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion

requesting reversion of operational rafale in indian air force back to 36 as a vandalism edit was made by an editor known as ossi kottov in the dassault rafale page. Rii12345 (talk) 18:57, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request

reversion of number of rafale in indian air force, requesting for number of rafales in the indian air force to be reverted back to 36 as some miscreant has falsely changed the number. 117.213.49.41 (talk) 04:26, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 07:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

Hello, I'm Swatjester. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Akash (missile), but the source cited did not support that content. It has been removed for now, but if you would like to include a citation that verifies the content and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. We take source misrepresentation very seriously on Wikipedia. Please take care not to do so again -- and additionally, please further refrain from uncivil comments such as accusing others of "falsely deleting" things and being "propaganda pushers." ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 07:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Sukhoi Su-30MKI, you may be blocked from editing. If you continue to engage in battleground editing behavior, you are going to be subjected to sanctions. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 07:21, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, will remember. AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 14:59, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

can u help out , in S400 page ,Filmyboy is constantly updating fake information despite being reversed. AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 15:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to edits at IAF active military equipment:

Eurasian Times [63], unreliable per a February 2025 RfC.

According to WP:RS Eurasian times is unreliable. Your excuses of Reuters and Washingtonpost being unreliable despite a community consensus almost unanimously considering it as extremely reliable is completely unneeded. They are third party independent sources and that is all that matters.

If you revert the edit once more, I will have no choice but to escalate it to Wikipedia Administrators. Do not make this into an edit war. This will be your first warning. DarkPhantom23 (talk) 07:21, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Edit

I know what you have said, if you want you can escalate. I will not be editing it again. I didn't know about Pakistan community consensus , so made it. AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 05:57, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, your edit was again discarded by someone with more experience than me. AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 06:50, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Warning Issue

@DarkPhantom23 Please don't make unnecessary changes to any Aviation site before having confirmed unbiased references. If you do it again, I shall be forced to escalate the issue to the Wiki administrators. Consider this your 1st warning. AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 08:42, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you have bothered to read the talk page, this issue has already been sorted out.

You are not the person of contention. You have used a source which is prohibited via WP:RS and you expect me to accept that? Nice try.

I'd highly suggest for you to read WP:RS and WP:AGF before trying to make snarky comments about me. DarkPhantom23 (talk) 09:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

stop whining and beg IMF for more loans to support your economy. Get well soon. AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 06:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not from Pakistan as you are implying.

This will be your first and last warning in regards to your ad hominem attacks. DarkPhantom23 (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding ad hominem attacks, I took it personally, so I apologise for my conduct. About yhe warning part, I have been warned already by senior editors and I dont think I need it from you. Anyways, sorry again for the incident. AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 05:42, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I hope we both learn from this experience, and continue our very best to make Wikipedia a factual place.

Happy editing AbhijnanGhosh87 DarkPhantom23 (talk) 17:29, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 10:46, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for gross incivility and battleground conduct displayed in this edit in particular despite previous related warnings. If such conduct is repeated after your block expires, you are likely to be topic-banned from this highly contentious area or blocked indefinitely. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Abecedare (talk) 23:41, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

AbhijnanGhosh87 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I tried to reverse some one sided posts without authentic evidences from my part. There are no official confirmations from any side about loses and various media outlets amplify the issue by fake reporting. If i have dome something wrong unknowingly, I apologise for my mistakes. Will keep in mind not to repeat them. Can you please revert my block? Thanks and Regards AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 13:55, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not address your grossly uncivil comment. If you are unable to edit about topics related to Pakistan without insulting Pakistan or editors from Pakistan(or you think are from there), you risk a topic ban from the contentious topic area of India/Pakistan/Afghanistan(see the above notice). I think 72 hours was very generous. 331dot (talk) 15:05, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please do not gravedance

(Non-administrator comment) Opening a new ANI thread about an editor who was literally just indefinitely blocked for attacks can be taken as WP:GRAVEDANCING. I've shut down the thread, and to avoid any possible future WP:BOOMERANGs and sanctions, please keep cool when editing gets hot. Thank you. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 15:01, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok got it, thank you. Will keep that in mind in the future. AbhijnanGhosh87 (talk) 15:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]