User talk:Sdmarathe

SD, I would suggest you read up on the definition of edit-warring; repeatedly reverting or changing another editor or editors' contributions is edit-warring, regardless of precisely what you are doing (there a couple of exceptions, none applicable here). Taking it to the talk page was the right thing to do, and I am glad you did that, just do it sooner in the future. Vanamonde93 (talk) 07:13, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sdmarathe, you made four reverts which is more than edit-warring, I'll say. You are lucky that nobody reported you to WP:AN3 which would have resulted in your being blocked.

Also, do not remove others' messages to your talk-pages. It creates poor impression about you. I hope you will become a good editor on Wikipedia if you just take little time to read our policies and take care to follow them. Happy editing. -AsceticRosé 16:52, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thank you both. yes I have taken note of your feedback. Regards! --Sdmarathe (talk) 18:23, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please cast your vote at the AFD Shrikanthv (talk) 07:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SD, You are welcome to contribute to WikiProject Solar System, WikiProject Tourism, WikiProject Spirits and WikiProject Maharashtra. If you want any help regarding these issues then feel free to ask me. Regards. Human3015Send WikiLove  06:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you Human. I added myself to Maharashtra page and will add to other pages soon :-) --Sdmarathe (talk) 07:13, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly suggest you read on on the definitions of vandalism, and on the regulations of anonymous editing. You should not revert an edit because it was made by an IP, nor should you demand that they create an account before discussing it with them. If you have reasonable suspicion that they are an IP, even then, reporting them is the right thing to do, not simply stonewalling. Also, the IP in question was violating the RS policy, but was not engaging in vandalism; please be careful about the distinction, else you are liable to find yourself at AE. I also suggest that you read WP:ARBIPA and familiarize yourself with the restrictions. Vanamonde93 (talk) 22:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vanamonde93 - It appeared to me that the IP was engaged in reverts removing established templates that had been accepted previously and was violating RS policy - and I interpreted that as WP:van. I will take your advice into account in identifying the distinction. thank you! --Sdmarathe (talk) 22:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sdmarathe. It wasn't clear to begin with but eventually it was clear that the IP was disrupting. --AmritasyaPutra^T 19:06, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "2002 Gujarat Riots". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 8 September 2015.

The request for formal mediation concerning 2002 Gujarat Riots, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "2002 Gujarat Riots 2". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 17 September 2015.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at 2002 Gujarat riots. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 07:32, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The request for formal mediation concerning 2002 Gujarat Riots 2, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

		Happy Diwali!!!
		Sky full of fireworks, Mouth full of sweets, Home full of lamps, And festival full of sweet memories... Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali. Kautilya3 (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply] Send Diwali wishings by adding {{subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with Vanamonde93, subject to the usual exceptions. See WP:IBAN for details of what this type of sanction forbids.

You have been sanctioned because of your long-running vendetta against them, culminating in your ill-advised participation in this AE discussion.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. GoldenRing (talk) 08:51, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment_request:_India-Pakistan regarding the ARE decision that affected you. — MapSGV (talk) 20:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why Pakistan is not a regional power is south Asia although all sources are properly cited? Pakistan meets every requirement to be in the list and you have been abusing your powers just to keep Pakistan out of the list.

Usman47 (talk) 05:45, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

None of the citations list Pakistan as regional power. the second source mentions it as mid power contention - but that is ranked 29th on the list right next to Algeria - that would not qualify for being regional power. None of the sources actually cites Pakistan as regional power to my knowledge. I could not see details on 3rd citation. Can you please provide the details on that? Oh and by the way I only made 1 edit on this page, so I can not be qualified as abusing my powers !! Sdmarathe (talk) 05:56, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In your opinion how does a country classify as a regional power? You see Iran on the list don't you? Please tell me they are better than Pakistan in any way but they are considered a regional power in there own region. Regional power means countries who possess influence in the region and can get things done. Pakistan possess enough influence that no one can ignore Pakistan militarily, economically or politically. A common example of this is the US. When do they say that Pakistan can be ignored? It's just common sense really. You name me one country that can ignore Pakistan in south Asia. Further more below are some more citations just for clarification sake.

https://www.quora.com/Is-Pakistan-a-regional-power https://southasianvoices.org/contours-of-south-asia/ https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/public/Research/Asia/080512summary.pdf https://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2013/05/18/india-pakistan-and-china-the-importance-of-regional-powers-in-a-post-u-s-afghanistan/ https://tribune.com.pk/story/1704256/3-pakistan-underachieving-14th-powerful-country-asia-report/ https://nation.com.pk/07-Sep-2017/pak-us-regional-power-politics Usman47 (talk) 06:26, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

none of the links provided meets WP:RS standards. Please cite wp:RS sources thanks! Sdmarathe (talk) 12:07, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Of course, Pakistan is a regional power. Do not be pedantic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:56, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Mar4d (talk) 11:55, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested arbitration enforcement against you. The thread can be found here. As described at WP:BANEX, you are permitted to reply at that request; such a reply will not violate your IBAN. Vanamonde (talk) 11:01, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!. Mar4d (talk) 15:06, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sd, are you around? A question has been posed to you at the DRN. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:08, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What happened? the thread is now in archive Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_167#Talk:Regional_power#Pakistan --DBigXray 19:26, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3 and DBigXray: Sdmarathe was the last person to reply that thread.[1] To this day no sources complying with WP:CONTEXTMATTERS have been provided. Orientls (talk) 06:49, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suffered an accident so will have limited access to Wikipedia. Thanks Sdmarathe (talk) 18:58, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, SD Please take care of your health. I hope you are recovering well. Please accept my well wishes for your speedy recovery. --DBigXray 19:28, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that, Sd. All the best for your recovery! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:34, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Best wishes for your recovery. Orientls (talk) 06:48, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Get well soon, mate. MBlaze Lightning ^talk 07:14, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you all for kind words !! Very grateful for your wishes! Sdmarathe (talk) 03:51, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	Wishing a Speedy recovery
	Hope you get well soon. DBigXray 19:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following sanction now applies to you:

Indefinite topic ban from the conflict between India and Pakistan, broadly construed.

You have been sanctioned . This sanction is imposed on the basis of a pattern of disruptive behavior. This was mostly highlighted in this discussion, in which multiple editors supported including you within the mass topic ban handed out. You've continued your involvement in the underlying personal dispute, including being involved in chilling SPIs that were found to be unsubstantiated, such as Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Liborbital. More recently, you unnecessarily included information about the topic area in the start of an RfC at Talk:Regional power in an apparent attempt to exclude Mar4d from the discussion. He was a long-time contributor of that page, including in recent discussions about the same general issue. You promptly reported him to me for a topic ban violation when he contributed in a way that did not comment on your example. This follows a general trend in this topic area of attempting to silence or remove the opposition through abuse of process.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 20:38, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify your statement regarding this (where is the talk page consensus?). – Batreeq ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 00:39, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article was a redirect stub - and redirected to another, bigger article. The information that you added is already part of that bigger page. HenceI asked if you had a talk page consensus to a) actually expand this stub page into an article b) add details that were already present in the redirect . . Sdmarathe (talk) 04:11, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the last section on talk page, consensus was to redirect. thanks! Sdmarathe (talk) 00:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sdmarathe. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sd, do you have interest in dealing with this IP request? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 03:51, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will look into it Thanks Kautilya3 Sdmarathe (talk) 05:11, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had to remove as it was posted after the AfD was closed. Thanks, Lourdes 04:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]