Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

— DaxServer (talk) 10:19, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Will definitely from now on. Akshaypatill (talk) 11:08, 30 October 2021 (UTC) ThanksAkshaypatill (talk) 11:16, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Fowler&fowler. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Subhas Chandra Bose have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. The lead sentence has been in place for over ten years. Any major changes to it, will require a talk page consensus. Best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:34, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fowler&fowler: I hope you understand what a lead is. This is an introductory section and should introduce the person in question. It is often seen on Google when someone searches for it. Have a look at WP:EXPLAINLEAD.By going through the page history, the content you are being adamant on can be included in subsequent paragraphs. Also, I had attached valid sources for my claims. I will be reverting it back if you don't provide a valid reason for the revert, as you are undermining Wiki guidelines.Akshaypatill (talk) 13:18, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid, you need to read WP:BRD. You made the bold change to a lead sentence that has been in place for years; I reverted it; it is now time to discuss it on the talk page first, arrive at a new consensus, and only then reword it. I recommend that you not edit war and self-revert instead. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:34, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fowler&fowler: A sentence being in place for years doesn't prove anything, especially when being reverted again and again. Don't assume role of maintainer of the page. And I haven't removed any content so I don't think there is no question of conflicting information and consensus. I have rephrased it to make it more readable and added two sentences that he is actually known for.Akshaypatill (talk) 13:50, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BRD says "the article's talk page." That is where you need to establish a consensus for your bold edits. A new consensus takes times, weeks at the very least. Please also read WP:Lead fixation. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:53, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fowler&fowler: Do you have any objection over the content? As in it not being true or distortion of facts?Akshaypatill (talk) 14:21, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Subhas Chandra Bose. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. Please note edit-warring is not the solution. Per WP:BRD you need to discuss your edits on the article's talk page, i.e. Talk:Subhas Chandra Bose and establish a consensus for them there. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:12, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:45, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RFCBEFORE. An RFC cannot be started about one edit is an set of evolving edits on a page. You appeared on the Subhas Chandra Bose page some 12 hours ago. You attempted to make some ungrammatical, very poorly sourced edits. Upon being reverted you attempted to edit war. When that did not get you anywhere, you began a dispute resolution. At this point, you had still not voiced any discontent on the article's talk page. I then tried to make the lead more coherent, but without changing anything you had written, you did not like that either. You started an RFC on the fly. When people use Wikipedia's various dispute resolution systems frivolously or misuse them in an attempt to push their own edits, it is WP:DISRUPTION. I am a longstanding competent editor. I am the main author of the FA India. To suggest that I don't know how to cite or to write the lead is insulting. Be warned, you are getting close to be penalized. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 06:40, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fowler&fowler: I ain't discrediting your contributions till the date, but don't be adamant to changes. Before accusing me of edit warring check out your own talk page. You have already got warnings from other editors for edit warring in this month. And it was you, who started all this mess. You could have stated me the reason for the reverting. Instead, you kept insisting in consensus. And now you are trying to refrain me from asking for consensus.

And don't invent ungrammatical words like Chair-using in the name of the encyclopedic language.Akshaypatill (talk) 06:55, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Akshaypatill. I notice there are quite a few posts from you on User talk:Fowler&fowler. Among other things, you emphasize that your recent 3RR warning is the third this month.[1] So it is, but two of those warnings are from you, and you obviously posted the one before in retaliation for F&f's warning to you, which is bad manners. (Of course F&f was provably aware of the edit warring rules, since they just warned you. Don't retaliate.) In another recent post, it seems you favour a source from 1919 [sic] over more modern ones, with a reference to WP:Reliable_sources#Age_matters — really? That guideline does not appear to support your point about "insulting the works of these legends". Please, altogether, be aware of WP:HOUNDING. You seem to have recently followed F&F to Nick Fury: Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. (film), an article that you had never previously edited and that doesn't fall in your usual Wikipedia interests, in order to revert them. (I see you refer obliquely to it just above.) You did so without addressing their point about "ableist terminology". That "wheelchair-bound is an English phrase" is hardly the point. Perhaps you'd like to look up Ableist in Wikipedia, or "Wheelchairbound" on Wiktionary. Anyway, please don't post on Fowler&fowler's talkpage again unless you need to give them a required alert; you have been completely dominating it, and not with the best kinds of discussion. @Fowler&fowler: please make it symmetrical by not posting on this page again. Bishonen | tålk 07:35, 31 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]