User talk:Saha.rj

The article on Manmohan Singh needs some edits. The statement w.r.t IITs has to be updated as all the new IITs are functioning.

Saha.rj (talk) 14:10, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Saha.rj! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:26, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Introduction to contentious topics: new version, minimum edit count and account age

You have recently edited a page related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups, 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.

Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days in order to make edits related to two subtopics: (1) Indian military history, or (2) social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal.

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.

Ekdalian (talk) 08:19, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2026

Hi Saha.rj! I noticed that you've made several edits in order to restore a version of Pohela Boishakh. The impulse to repeatedly undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure that you're aware of Wikipedia's edit warring policy. Repeatedly undoing the changes made by other users in a back-and-forth fashion like this is disallowed, even if you feel what you're doing is justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages in order to try to reach a consensus with the other editors involved. If you are unable to come to an agreement at Talk:Pohela Boishakh, please use one of the dispute resolution options that are available in order to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of repeatedly reverting other editors' changes can help you avoid getting drawn into edit wars. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've not seen closely what the edit related to. Someone reverted my earlier edit without any discussion. Edit warring policy should ideally be directed at those who revert edits without any justification. Saha.rj (talk) 20:20, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is not. The "build consensus" section of the verifiability policy is in favor of removal (The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on editors seeking to include disputed content.) and the edit warring policy applies to re-addition of content just as it does to its removal. Edit warring is disruptive and prohibited even if you are right. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:00, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It applies to "disputed content". The content added by me is not in dispute, even by the one who removed it without any discussion. Saha.rj (talk) 07:15, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, you need to learn more about our policies. The burden of achieving consensus for any valid content is on the editor who is adding the same; read WP:BURDEN, WP:ONUS! Ekdalian (talk) 10:17, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Does "adding" also not include "deleting"? Can one delete without consensus? Saha.rj (talk) 09:09, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Addition is the opposite of removal. Deletion without consensus is fine, as long as it is done with good intentions. Restoring the content requires consensus. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:31, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]