User talk:Hayras123/Archive 1

September 2017

Hello, I'm Wario-Man. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Bactria, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Wario-Man (talk) 14:44, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Please don't add text to sourced text or use our articles as sources

The only time you can add text to text with a citation is when you've read the source and the text you want to add is in it. We never use our articles as sources. Doug Weller talk 14:24, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Per [1]. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Having said that, the reason why I reverted you, is because you removed this;[2]

• Regarding Tajiks, the Encyclopædia Britannica states: The Tajiks are the direct descendants of the Iranian peoples whose continuous presence in Central Asia and northern Afghanistan is attested from the middle of the 1st millennium bc. The ancestors of the Tajiks constituted the core of the ancient population of Khwārezm (Khorezm) and Bactria, which formed part of Transoxania (Sogdiana). They were included in the empires of Persia and Alexander the Great, and they intermingled with such later invaders as the Kushāns and Hepthalites in the 1st–6th centuries ad. Over the course of time, the eastern Iranian dialect that was used by the ancient Tajiks eventually gave way to Farsi, a western dialect spoken in Iran and AfghanistanTajikistan: History.

This material: (Cambridge Encyclopedia Vol. 8, pg. 2246, "Bactria - Geography, History, Tokharistan, Archaeological sites", with this quote "The Bactrians are one of the ancestral lines of the modern-day Pashtuns, Tajiks, of Central Asia.") was already present on the article.
What you did, was copy-pasting it once again into the same section,[3] while removing the Enc. Britannica material.[4] That's textbook WP:TENDENTIOUS editing. If you read my edit summary carefully, you would've seen that I just asked you to redo your edit once more, without removing sourced content (i.e. Enc. Britannica).[5] Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 22:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Bactria. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Wario-Man (talk) 23:23, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Ghurid dynasty, you may be blocked from editing. Wario-Man (talk) 23:25, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Khalji dynasty. Wario-Man (talk) 23:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Edits

I edited three articles all of which you reverted for some reasons, Wario-Man:

Ghurids Please explain to me how adding neutral sources while not removing the part about Tajiks is "adding my own personal commentary". I stated what the sources say and then I mentioned the source, while you seem to keep on reverting it. You should not be able to decide which sources are shown and which are not. Please fix this.

Bactrians

Please tell me how "A concise history of Afghanistan in 25 volumes" and "Encyclopedia Iranica" are unreliable sources. It clearly states that Pashtuns and Tajiks are descendants of Bactrians: Cambridge Encyclopedia Vol. 8, pg. 2246, "Bactria - Geography, History, Tokharistan, Archaeological sites", with this quote "The Bactrians are one of the ancestral lines of the modern-day Pashtuns, Tajiks, of Central Asia."

this is only one of among the other sources I used.

Khaljis "POV and fringe". First of, please explain what this actually means. I only added one line from a book and quoted it and yet is somehow counts as expressing my point of view.

Just remember one thing friend,

Ta yak nafar Afghan ast, zinda Afghanistan ast

Please answer it rather than deleting this message.

Hayras123 (talk) 00:44, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Many of your edits involve misrepresentation of sources and use of poor sources (e.g. use of Wikipedia mirrors). That's why multiple editors have undone your edits. For your next few edits, I'd suggest discussing your proposed changes on the talk page of the articles before you make the edits -- suggestions from others can help you fix any problems with the content you intend to add.

As a side note, if your objective is to push your ethnic agenda, please create a personal blog. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia, your objective should be to build an encyclopedia, not to promote your ethnic group. utcursch | talk 16:56, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

The Champions of the True Faith, Farid Abel, 2016 is a self-published book. The World Heritage Encyclopedia is a ripoff from Wikipedia. Doug Weller talk 17:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

This isn't an effort to 'push an ethnic agenda'. Many, many Afghans know of the huge bias Wikipedia has when it comes to their people. A lot of the editors on this site are Tajik/Iranians with an ethnic agenda to push and have learned the ins and outs of the ways of Wikipedia to use at their advantage and use sources that are themselves biased against Pashtuns that results in an echo chamber of nothing but 'Tajik-washing' the history of this region. Any person would clearly recognize that, for example, the Ghurids can never be Tajik as the literal definition of Tajik is a Persian-speaker and yet the sources clearly state did not natively speak Persian. Every source clearly states that Bactrians closest modern-day languages as the Eastern Iranian languages of the region, including Yidgha, Munji, and Pashto. Yet ethnic agenda-pushing leads to the use of sources, such as Encyclopedia Iranica, that are in and of themselves already biased towards Pashtuns. Encyclopedia Iranica, in all its bias, states that the closest languages to Bactrian are Pashto and Yidgha-Munji. The very source the article uses to prove Tajiks are descendants of Bactrians mention, in the exact same sentence within two words of each other that Pashtuns are also descendants. Please, if you want to create a non-biased encyclopedia as you call it, stop cherry picking certain facts from sources and include what the sources actually say. I may be a lowly Pashtun according to some of you folk, but at least I am Pashtun. Hayras123 (talk) 06:34, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Our policy requires us to show all reliable sourced sides of a dispute and if there is a dispute present both sides proportionately to the sources. Some are here.[6] and from Google Scholar, here. It seems disputed, so the articles must show the dispute. Doug Weller talk 11:54, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ghurid dynasty. 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 that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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. Wario-Man (talk) 07:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia.
For;

• Making personal attacks[7]-[8]
• Edit warring and violating WP:OR on the Bactria article[9]-[10]-[11]-[12]-[[13]
• Edit warring / WP:UNDUE / WP:JDL pushing on the South Asia article[14]-[15]-[16]
• Removing content from the Tajiks page[17]
• Violating WP:RS, WP:WAR, WP:OR on the Ghurid dynasty page.[18]-[19]-[20]-[21]-[22]

It is apparent that you are here on a "mission" to change content, because you don't like seeing it. In other words; this "mission" of yours, is clearly not to build this encyclopedia. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:29, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@LouisAragon:Did you read my previous comment? I want to build this encyclopedia as neutral and informative rather than trying to push for a certain ethnic agenda. Just in case you haven't read my previous comment:

This isn't an effort to 'push an ethnic agenda'. Many, many Afghans know of the huge bias Wikipedia has when it comes to their people. A lot of the editors on this site are Tajik/Iranians with an ethnic agenda to push and have learned the ins and outs of the ways of Wikipedia to use at their advantage and use sources that are themselves biased against Pashtuns that results in an echo chamber of nothing but 'Tajik-washing' the history of this region. Any person would clearly recognize that, for example, the Ghurids can never be Tajik as the literal definition of Tajik is a Persian-speaker and yet the sources clearly state did not natively speak Persian. Every source clearly states that Bactrians closest modern-day languages as the Eastern Iranian languages of the region, including Yidgha, Munji, and Pashto. Yet ethnic agenda-pushing leads to the use of sources, such as Encyclopedia Iranica, that are in and of themselves already biased towards Pashtuns. Encyclopedia Iranica, in all its bias, states that the closest languages to Bactrian are Pashto and Yidgha-Munji. The very source the article uses to prove Tajiks are descendants of Bactrians mention, in the exact same sentence within two words of each other that Pashtuns are also descendants. Please, if you want to create a non-biased encyclopedia as you call it, stop cherry picking certain facts from sources and include what the sources actually say.

Hayras123 (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Wario-Man (talk) 14:07, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

DRN case closed

Thank you for seeking assistance with the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Unfortunately, the case you filed had to be closed as it did not meet the minimum DRN criteria. There was not an extensive enough talkpage discussion. Please use a talkpage to discuss ways to improve the article. If, after a good collaborative effort is made, a dispute still exists, you should feel welcome to refile. Nihlus 19:23, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Wario-Man (talk) 08:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

He's correct. This behavior has to stop now. Read WP:AGF. Doug Weller talk 11:46, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pukhtoonkhwa Mazdoor Kissan Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pashtun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 1 January 2018 (UTC)