User talk:Re Packer&Tracker

Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 83.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present.

It seems like you and I cannot reach a conclusion regarding Ghori's use of diplomatic tactics in the second battle of tarain so I am making an attempt to resolve the dispute. Since you think that the language in my edit is not neutral and I am using a nationalist pov (which I am not I am using neutral language), please tell me how you would write it in neutral language. All I want is the mention of the fact that ghori tricked prithviraj into a truce and then led a surprise attack. Please feel free to add any other thing that you want. Gspgoat^(talk) 18:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gspgoat: It's advisable for you to discuss the content dispute on the particular talk page and not on my talk page. Your needless emphasizes on the dated nationalist narrative that Muhammad's peace overture lead to the rout of Prithviraj army won't going to get a mention in the lead, neither we can't assert such a contentious claim in Wiki voice either.

Anyways, I already added couple of modern sources from Satish Chandra and Andre Wink that repudiates this notion of surprise attack contributing to the rout of Cauhana army, rather they mentions specifically that it was due to Muhammad's superior generalship skills that he carried the day despite being outnumbered (though the numbers are exaggerating for strength of the armies from Persian chroniclers) Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 18:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Prithviraj Chauhan shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Gspgoat^(talk) 20:11, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Muhammad of Ghor you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Muhammad of Ghor for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sangsangaplaz -- Sangsangaplaz (talk) 23:42, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Re Packer&Tracker. Unfortunately the color you've chosen for use in your signature does not meet contrast guidelines for accessibility. That means that people with vision issues will not be able to see it easily (or at all). You might consider using one of the colors listed on the chart at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/CSS colors for text on white or testing various colors using a website such as this one or this one. It's desirable to have contrast that's at the AAA level. The minimum is AA level. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 00:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]