User talk:Wormholexx
Hello, Wormholexx, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
- Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
- Check out some of these pages:
- If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 05:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
- Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
- In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
- Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
- Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like
<ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing). - In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
- If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
You have been pruned from the Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Members list.
[edit]Hi Wormholexx! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 1 year.
Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Members.
Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:00, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]
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. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
Zalaraz (talk) 08:48, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
January 2026
[edit]You appear to be making edits solely to attain extended confirmed status, what is called gaming the system. The system exists for a reason.; EC status has now been revoked, you will need to ask for it manually at WP:PERM after a fresh 500 edits. You may be unblocked when you tell what contributions you will make. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
You are no longer blocked, I did so in error. But your EC is still revoked. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hello 331dot. I have been here for a long time, and I might be outdated. I will stop welcoming users and will stick to fixing typos and grammar, and possibly reversing unconstructive edits.
- It won’t happen again, and I apologize. Wormholexx (talk) 10:02, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- If you want to welcome users, that's fine, but you seemed to be doing so exclusively to attain advanced permissions; your edits were at a rapid pace which occurred after you were told you needed EC status to edit in certain areas. The point of that requirement is so the editor learns about relevant policies and practices before editing in formally designated contentious topic areas. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- I understand the sensitivity of the topics, and I think there is a misunderstanding here.
- For example, I made constructive edits to the article Gorehabba (which was not restricted when I was editing it; it is now semi-protected, which is good). These edits do not fall under EC or contentious topics such as Indian military history or social groups.
- However, an editor reverted my constructive edit and placed a contentious topics label on my talk page (1 2). That banner is often misused by editors who disagree with edits made by non-EC users.
- To make edits to that article, EC is not required. I am not wrong in this regard, as the article’s talk page does not have a contentious topics label and many unregistered users were editing the article. This is clearly a misunderstanding, and I acknowledge the good faith of the editor Chess enjoyer. I also expect the same good faith from other editors and Wikipedians.
- I may be innocent in this case, and it would be good if I were given a chance to defend my side as well. Once again, Thank you! Wormholexx (talk) 10:36, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- @331dot This editor (Rasnaboy) gave me a warm welcome on my talk page, so I visited his contributions (1). I noticed that he was welcoming many users, which helped me learn that welcoming people is encouraged.
- This is not the first time I have welcomed users. You can check the time period of my first welcome banner usage (2). It was well before the launch of the contentious topics banner. Wormholexx (talk) 10:59, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- It is true that the festival does not fall under the extended-confirmed restriction, but it does fall under the broad South Asia topic area, so you were given the notice above. As noted, it is simply a notification and not a judgment about the merits of your edits.
- As you were rapidly welcoming new users, it appeared that you were doing so for the purpose of attaining extended-confirmed status to be able to contribute about Indian military history and/or social groups. If that's not the case, you may bring that up if and when you ask for EC status at WP:PERM. 331dot (talk) 11:34, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- If I get EC, shall i welcome new users? for now Can I edit articles that do not come under Indian military or social groups?
- I often see unregistered users editing articles as usual, and some of them add unsourced information. If I fix or revert such edits, am I violating any rules? I am very confused.
- An unregistered user adds unsourced information, and a non-EC editor reverts it with the edit summary “valid source needed.” Then another editor (who has EC), instead of warning the person who added the unsourced information, places contentious topic banners on the editor who reverted the vandalism. This is very confusing and disappointing. Wormholexx (talk) 11:50, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- You may welcome users irrespective of whether you have EC status or not. You may edit articles that don't require EC status to edit.
- Certain topic areas that have been shown to be particularly contentious have restrictions in place to prevent disruption. Indian military history and social groups(including castes and political parties specifically) tend to evoke strong feelings in editors which can lead to edit warring and other disruption. The EC restriction is intended to make sure editors learn relevant policies before getting into a contentious topic.
- You may make edits that are not subject to EC restrictions. You may remove unsourced edits about specific living people even in restricted topic areas, but if the unsourced edit is not about a specific living person, you should not remove it. 331dot (talk) 12:53, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification. Wormholexx (talk) 13:20, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- If you want to welcome users, that's fine, but you seemed to be doing so exclusively to attain advanced permissions; your edits were at a rapid pace which occurred after you were told you needed EC status to edit in certain areas. The point of that requirement is so the editor learns about relevant policies and practices before editing in formally designated contentious topic areas. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 27 January 2026 (UTC)