Gotitbro

Welcome

Hello! I am assuming you have come over from the English Wikipedia, so you are probably familiar with the way this wiki works. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Here are a few links to help you adjust:

• An English Wikipedian's guide
• Writing in Simple English
• Simple talk: our help desk, reference desk and village pump- in one page
• How to copy from English Wikipedia

There is much to do here. For example, there are a lot of articles that do not exist yet, which you can bring over from the English Wikipedia and simplify. Do have a look around and see what you would like to do. Thank you for joining us, and you know how to contact me if you need help. BRP ^ever 16:34, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Uri

Thanks for deleting the page Battle of Uri (2022). I agree that it is hoax and would appreciate it to be deleted. Yes all of this is wrong information. I don't think we need the article. Thank you. Muhafiz-e-Pakistan (talk) 11:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Anachronism

"Pakistan" is not an anachronism. What else do you call the region? You'll need consensus to do things like this. 🪐●Haumeon 23:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

South Asia, Indian subcontinent and the like are used in historical contexts. The recent changes you are referring to (which introduce "ancient Pakistan") have also been without consensus and not used in reliable references where they have been added. Gotitbro (talk) 23:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry for venting on the ANI, I just got mad for multiple reasons. Also, yeah. Now I understand your reasons.

However, while Cyber.eyes may have done something wrong, keeping her on simplewiki will not compromise our integrity. She has done a lot more good than bad at this point.

Plus, those cats were agf 🪐●Haumeon 23:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

September 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. You might not have done it on purpose, but your recent change removed helpful information from Wikipedia. We ask that you do not remove things from pages, as you did to "Mahabharata", without giving a good reason in the change summary. If it was a mistake, do not worry. The part of the article you removed has been put back. If you want to try things out, please use the sandbox. If you would like to learn how to help Wikipedia, please see the welcome page. Thank you. Removal of sourced content. – Cyber.Eyes.2005^Talk 09:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@Cyber.Eyes.2005: Does adherence to NPOV mean anything? Your edits which seek to insert every untenable link to Pakistan in almost anything to do with the history of South Asia fail everything what wiki projects stand for. That you do not understand what anachronism and why your POV is disruptive is telling. The sources you add either do not support what is being stated or are highly synthesized to push certain POV, that of ancient Pakistan and the like. Your edits are damaging the repute of this project and are not going legitimize whatever it is that you ultimately seek to achieve here.

I have tried my best to avoid even the slightest of POV towards any viewpoint in the edits here, anyone with NPOV in mind would hardly oppose them. If you continue with these disruptions as such, your efforts to be reintegrated in the broader broader wiki community, including enwiki, are not going to come to fruition. Gotitbro (talk) 09:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Please try to gain consensus on article talk pages before reverting edits, especially those that are sourced. What you are engaging in here is considered WP:EDITWAR, and since "you have been working on Wikipedia for years", you should be well aware of this. You have been warned about this behavior multiple times, both here and on English Wikipedia. Please have a look at WP:ONESTRIKE. Also, take a moment to review WP:DISPUTE. Reverting edits simply because you believe they are anachronistic is not helpful. Please stop reverting without consensus and initiate discussions on article talk pages instead. – Cyber.Eyes.2005^Talk 09:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I think I know enough about enwiki policies to know when reversals constitute an edit war. "Multiple times" this is the first notice of it here, if you are referring to the ANI report that was about your problematic behaviour none of which unfortunately constituted a discussion of the content.

A mere look at the content will tell anyone familiar with South Asia topics that your edits are anachronistic and POV-filled, that you are gaming the system just because this project does not have enough eyes from subject-matter experts is ultimately not going to bode well. Gotitbro (talk) 10:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

"gaming the system", is this just as good faith as the ANI report you made against me? I've been contributing to Simple English Wikipedia for some time now and am familiar with how this wiki operates. FYI again, Simple Wikipedia is not the same as English Wikipedia, and its Do's and Dont's are discussed here, within this community. The accusations you made of sockpuppetry and creating hoaxes, was definately not made in good faith and came across as a blatant WP:ATTACK. You clearly appear to have a conflict of interest, and the removal of sourced content and categories under the claim of them being anachronistic does not seem so NPOV to me. Moreover, the editors on the ANI board did give a "mere look at my content" and determined that my edits were not problematic. You are welcome to contribute constructively on this wiki, but this approach is not conducive to collaboration. – Cyber.Eyes.2005^Talk 10:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

It was made in the good faith that NPOV was seriously being violated, when sources do not support the content that is being cited and when there are outright fabrications that constitutes a hoax. To state that I have a conflict of interest, while you have been inserting outright unsupported POV into a myriad of extant articles is amusing (not to speak of ones that have been newly created), uncritically dropping sources (a lot of them also not historically RS) without any heed to what they are actually saying to support preconceived notions does not an encyclopedia make.

The editors were not ticked off by your edits simply because they are unfamiliar with the topic area, editors at enwiki did notice the blatant POVPUSH being attempted here and which is what lead to the denial of your unblock request. Your [sockpuppetry and] hoaxes there are well known and would raise concern with anyone who sees the same being repeated/inserted here. Gotitbro (talk) 11:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) pinging @Cyber.Eyes.2005 Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry

I'd like to say that I am sorry for venting all those times and hounding you. I admit my mistake and promise to never do these things again. The reasons I did so were many, but now that I think about it, I was acting recklessly and like a fool. I should have been less mean. 🪐●Haumeon 18:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I will try to be neutral like I should

Cyber.eyes made cats and pages in good faith (that's what I should assume per WP:AGF) but was slightly slanted towards POV. As nobody warned her of this, she grew more POV and then started to insert links to Pakistan everywhere. Gotitbro has recognized this, but I got mad for reasons and vented.

My sincere and unreserved apologies

Hi Gotitbro, I would like to sincerely and unreservedly apologise for my comments towards you and for dismissing your valid concerns, At that time It read in a way that you simply wanted this editor blocked for their EN behaviour and that you were also using "anachronistic editing" as an excuse. Unfortunately I didn't do my due diligence here and didn't check any further than that and I simply believed your accusations were baseless when they clearly wasn't, so I sincerely and unreservedly apologise for my comments and for the way I treat you and your complaint and too would like to thank you for not only bringing this to the admins attention but for also for your contributions to the Simple Wikipedia.

I know I've said this on ANI but I also felt you deserved it "face to face", Thank you for raising your concerns at ANI and thank you for your contributions too, Happy editing, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:51, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I am sorry

		The Original Barnstar
		Dear Gotitbro, I am writing to express my sincere apologies for the unfounded accusations I made against you regarding sockpuppetry. My actions were inappropriate and have caused unnecessary distress. I realize that my words were harmful and I regret the negative impact they may have had on your reputation and contributions to Wikipedia. I value the work that you do and recognize the importance of maintaining a respectful and collaborative environment. I would like to apologize for any misunderstandings or hurt that my actions may have caused. I am committed to learning from this experience and ensuring that I conduct myself in a more responsible and respectful manner in the future. Thank you for your understanding and patience.

🪐●Haumeon 00:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Apologies

Although my comment was a minor one, I still want to apologise. Please don't hold any grudges. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)