Revision as of 02:59, 1 December 2022 editWorldbruce (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers128,716 edits →Accusing other editors of bias: new sectionTag: New topic← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:28, 2 December 2022 edit undoWorldbruce (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers128,716 edits →Accusing other editors of biasTag: RevertedNext edit → | ||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
] Please remember to ] when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-agf2 --> ] (]) 02:59, 1 December 2022 (UTC) | ] Please remember to ] when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-agf2 --> ] (]) 02:59, 1 December 2022 (UTC) | ||
] Please stop your ]. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, as you did at ], you may be ]. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Misplaced Pages.<!-- Template:uw-agf3 --> --] (]) 17:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:28, 2 December 2022
Disambiguation link notification for October 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dhaka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burger. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Do not continue reverting
Hi Solomon The Magnifico! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Dhaka several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Dhaka, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Worldbruce (talk) 12:18, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- I explained the matter on the talk page. I did not constantly revert within a 24 hour period. Hence, your warning seems a bit exaggerated. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 22:52, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Casting aspersions
Thank you for trying to keep Misplaced Pages free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Chittagong, are not considered vandalism under Misplaced Pages policy. Misplaced Pages has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage editors. Please see what is not vandalism for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism.
Be careful to remain civil in your edit summaries and discussions, however strongly you feel about an issue. Misplaced Pages is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. One editor must not accuse another of misbehavior, such as vandalism or sockpuppetry, without evidence. Doing so is a personal attack, and can lead to being blocked. Worldbruce (talk) 23:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Worldbruce Well noted. But I shouldn't be the only one protecting this content. The montage was there before me. It was only one image that was altered. I should not be receiving personal attacks from that editor because of a simple alteration. Thanks anyways for the heads up.--Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 00:17, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- Bangladesh is watched by about 1500 editors, Dhaka by more than 300, Chittagong by nearly 200. If no one else is reverting changes, maybe it's because there's nothing seriously wrong with most of the changes, and the content you are "protecting" isn't really any better. Editors are expected to assume other editors have good intentions. You've raised some reasonable points about how up-to-date images are, and about geographic diversity. Try to reach consensus about the content through discussion based on image use policy and image style guidelines. If you reach an impasse, various dispute resolution mechanisms are available. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:28, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- I know for a fact that my content is better simply because anyone with a reasonable, good faith knowledge of Bangladesh would understand where I am coming from. If similar disruptions occurred in other country or city articles, editors are quick to revert. Why isn't it happening in the case of Bangladesh? Is it deliberate to keep this country's coverage at sub-par quality? Oddly, neighboring India enjoys better protection. Maybe it's because India is watched by more pro-active editors, which is clearly lacking from Bangladesh.--Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 12:41, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- Bangladesh is watched by about 1500 editors, Dhaka by more than 300, Chittagong by nearly 200. If no one else is reverting changes, maybe it's because there's nothing seriously wrong with most of the changes, and the content you are "protecting" isn't really any better. Editors are expected to assume other editors have good intentions. You've raised some reasonable points about how up-to-date images are, and about geographic diversity. Try to reach consensus about the content through discussion based on image use policy and image style guidelines. If you reach an impasse, various dispute resolution mechanisms are available. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:28, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Travelogue.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Concern about Sheikh Mujibur Rahman
It is strange that when I am telling to suggest changes for the proposed lead section you don't answer. But when I execute the lead section, you revert my action showing some "reason" (now I am not here to debate the reasons you showed, we can always start new discussion to debate your reason but this is not the time). But I can't keep the present lead section even it is better, because in future edit war will happen for this lead I suspect. So, I want to give to two options to choose one.
- Answer my concerns in the talk page in Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and help me to edit and create the lead section so that both can reach a compromise, or
- We can go to Dispute resolution to request a better lead section, including all our concerns that will help us to prevent future edit wars.
So the choice is yours. Instead of ignoring my messages that would be great if you help to do that, but even if you don't want to then we have second option and Dispute resolution seems promising enough. Mehedi Abedin 07:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Economy of Bangladesh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BRAC.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Gulshan Avenue from Gulshan 1.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gulshan Avenue from Gulshan 1.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Worldbruce (talk) 16:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Accusing other editors of bias
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion/2022 November 30. Thank you. Worldbruce (talk) 02:59, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, as you did at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion/2022 November 30, you may be blocked from editing. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Misplaced Pages. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)