If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
@
Happyjit Singh Are you sure you want to engage in an edit war? Do you understand dispute resolution and the meaning of these notices? Do I need to take this to admins or you want to talk here? You added Ajit Sharma as JDU leader. Is the image of Ajit or Nitish? Do you know how these Infoboxes work? Have you read
MOS:INDELECT? Before making a new change I would suggest you to read it. One more revert and this is going to Admins. ShaanSenguptaTalk17:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh This is regarding the revert you made at
Next Indian general election in West Bengal.
MOS:INDELECT#Infobox says that Only those parties that are covered by Reliable Media as a major contender for winning that election are listed in the infobox. And party-wise Opinion polls results show that INC + CPI i.e. the Sanjukta Morcha is winning maximum 2 seats. Hence it is not termed as major contender by reliable sources. Therefore it can't be added. Plus looking at your contributions it shows that you are deeply interested in reverting other editors work. While you may not be wrong everytime but you need to tone down the aggression while doing so. Repeated abuses of the privilege may land you in unwanted trouble. ShaanSenguptaTalk01:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Your believe in opinion polls aren't logical. In opinion polls, it shows INDIA will win 0 seats in Gujarat 1 seat in Jharkhand etc. That doesn't mean we'll add only one party. West Bengal politics like Bangladesh any major party can win 0 seat and less than 20% vote share. You can remove it after announcement of results if they perform badly. I think we should discuss with others about it
User:XYZ 250706 and
User:Soman.
Happyjit Singh. I can't discuss with a person who has declared himself as a BJP member in her user page. I have to listen to others. As you mayn't be neutral. (
talk) 02:40, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
@
Happyjit Singh Looks like you haven't read the rules. You might believe that Opinion polls are illogical.
MOS:INDELECT doesn't. Had it, it wouldn't have been (t)here.
MOS:INDELECT#Infobox says The major contenders should not be removed from infobox after the results are declared even if they get 0 seats, because they "were" the major contenders "during" the election. So as you said it can be removed after results is wrong. As for CPI or CPIM I mentioned Sanjukta Morcha so this doesn't make sense. And no rule says that every party needs to be added. Infoboxes have always been made according to results of last election and the status defined by reliable sources (which is done through Opinion and Exit Polls). I won't revert you untill this discussion is finished because that will lead to a violation of
WP:3RR which I don't want. As for me being neutral, there is no need to give a proof to you, but just to let you know I am the one who
removed BJP from
Next Indian general election in Kerala since it is not a major party there which again violating the rule was added by you. Also
XYZ 250706 and
Soman, I would want you guys to move it to the
article's talk page if you think is right since this is a topic related disputed and now more than 2 editors are involved. Others interested might also want to be involved. ShaanSenguptaTalk04:06, 14 November 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh Although I wasn't here in 2004 or in 2009 or in 2014 or even in 2019. I am just assuming what others would have done. There is no mention of surveys in 2004 and 2009. But INC, CPIM, TMC all were major contenders till 2019. As for BJP being added in 2014, I can't understand what was the scenario in which it was added. But just because something (maybe wrong) has been done earlier doesn't make it correct to do now. And my suggestion to prevent it from going further would be for you to self-revert or prove (written in rules) that non-major parties can be added too. ShaanSenguptaTalk05:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)reply
See the opinion polls of 2004 Indian general election. They shows NDA's victory but UPA formed government. TMC was added in 2004 even though it won 1 seat. What if I add CPIM and INC vote share and seats together
Happyjit Singh (
talk)
05:48, 14 November 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh No that column is for party and not alliance. I just saw you have done this in Bihar election article also. This is vandalism. Please remove that yourself. Otherwise I will have to report that vandalism. That section is to mention party statistics not alliance. TMC is added because it had greater vote share than 2nd largest Congress. ShaanSenguptaTalk05:53, 14 November 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh That's what I said. I was not there when those pages were made so I am not going to look after every previous page. I have other things to do other than being here. I do this because I like it. Didn't mean I will give whole day for this. I will end myself with repeating myself. Two wrongs don't make one right. If any wrong thing is mentioned that doesn't mean we too can do the same with liberty. If you have time and are willing to, then please fix them. Had everything mentioned on Wikipedia be right then there had been no use of editors. I see you have slightly fixed the article. I would suggest we close this if you have no problem. ShaanSenguptaTalk06:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Thatswhy it is made uniformed so that everyone can see it in same way. But what about your violation of 3RR? Are you stopping here or shall I make a report. I advised you not to be aggressive with your editing but you have refused to listen to my advice. Now, If you want to stop then you can self revert which will make it uniformed for everyone. Or else let me know, so that I take it to admins. ShaanSenguptaTalk06:55, 14 November 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh I have never been to Telangana Legislative Assembly page. I can't be everywhere correcting everything. I told you before too, I have other things to do. I have not been given any Theka by Wikipedia to correct every wrong. I do so because I want to. Anyways, There are others too. And better you distance yourself from these comments and refrain from taking these unwanted digs at others. Digging a hole! ShaanSenguptaTalk16:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh How to make you understand to not remove the spacing from the Infoboxes of articles while editing? How many more times do I need to ask you. Can you please do source editing. Its been a month since you are here. Please start source editing, it will help you understand better. ShaanSenguptaTalk16:01, 20 November 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh, you have literally copied my userpage. But copying requires mind. Please correct the link of your account statistics. It is showing my stats. Also some more things needs correction. You have joined in October and not May. Your signature is not what you have mentioned there. Please find the rest and fix them. ShaanSenguptaTalk04:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Please don't mind for copying. I've corrected. (Happyjit Singh) 06:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Hello, I'm
Shaan Sengupta. An edit that you recently made to
Template:User Akhand Bharat has been
reverted. If you want to have a template with your statement, please make one for yourself. You can make something like
Template:User Secular Akhand Bharat or anything like this. Please donot make any change to my template. The template is used by others too and it is not necessary that they subscribe to your changes. I made it and I use it, I don't subscribe to that change so you can't do it. ShaanSenguptaTalk02:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Can you please understand
@
Happyjit Singh Can you please start following
MOS:INDELECT and use its guideline as a layout for Indian election articles. You have been told innumerable times but you don't seem to understand. You now are an extended confirmed user which means you have access to most of the articles. Please fall in line and follow rules. ShaanSenguptaTalk17:23, 24 December 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh Since you have accepted that MOS:INDELECT is for legislative and general election, so this article is also about general election so we have to follow it. Also when someone reverts and leaves a message at talk page you are supposed to discuss first before making further changes since your edits are disputed. Remember every edit is deemed to have
WP:Consensus until it is disputed. And this is disputed so please discuss first before restoring your edits. As far as rules about major and non-major are concerned MOS:INDELECT states that The major contenders should not be removed from infobox after the results are declared even if they get 0 seats, because they "were" the major contenders "during" the election which you again violated. Bcoz this clearly shows that even major parties can have 0 seats that doesn't make them non-major. I would once again advise you to discuss before restoring. Repeated policy violation of
WP:Consensus will force me to report your actions. ShaanSenguptaTalk02:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)reply
In general elections even some parties which swipe in the state with more than 40% 50% vote share get less than 20% and get 0 seats and the parties which get less than 2% votes and 0 seat swipe with more than 20% votes and become runner up as incase of Delhi, Tripura etc. So, there are no major contenders in general election at state level. I mean by general election
2024 Indian general election.
Happyjit Singh (
talk)
05:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)reply
You have recently edited a page related to India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, 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 special powers 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 practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.
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.
Hello, I've noticed you've been creating a bunch of pages and then moving them from title to title, often blanking the redirects behind you. Can you explain what is going on? Do you need help with anything? So many serial moves can be considered disruptive editing. ~ ONUnicorn(
Talk|
Contribs)problem solving16:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)reply
I came here to ask about your page moves as well. Moving an article should not be done carelessly.
Hi @
Happyjit Singh I have reverted your edits at two pages.
2023 Nagaland Legislative Assembly election
and
2023 Meghalaya Legislative Assembly election and the simple reason is bcoz you can read the information page of Indian Election article structure which says that parties considered major contenders at the time of election are not to be removed even if they get 0 seats. I have told this to you before too. But you seem to forget. Please remember next time and if you have some questions regarding this please ask before you just blindly revert me and restore your edit. Bcoz you are an extended confirmed user now and you need to be little less agressive with your actions. Also can you please explain why you passed an uncivil comment in your edit summary at the Nagaland page. Please read
WP:CIVIL and behave properly. There have been previous instances too ahere you have done the same. Please try not to repeat otherwise reporting this will be the only choice. Thank you. ShaanSenguptaTalk16:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh You removed every party except BJP & NDPP. What I can see is you removed major contenders like NCP who won 7 and NPP who won 5 and LJP (RV) had better vote share than NPP, therefore they were added. NPF was single largest party with best vote percentage in last election. Although it performed poorly in this election but as per MOS major contender is not removed even if it gets 0 seats. So what made you remove these parties. ShaanSenguptaTalk07:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Happyjit Singh I warned you just yesterday to not pass uncivil comments and judgements. This is the last warning you are getting for it. The next time you do, I will make sure you are dealt accordingly. You are noone to make judgements and accuse states of being undemocratic. Its their choice for parties. They maybe like the work of that party and I am not getting into debate of its performance. ShaanSenguptaTalk08:30, 29 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Administrators:Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by
administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's
privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an
IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee
may be summarily desysopped.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
blocking policy).
I'm an extended confirmed user of Wikipedia with 900 edits approx. My account is Happyjit Singh
/info/en/?search=User:Happyjit_Singh. Yesterday, someone alleged that I'm a sockpuppet of Marxist Economics. The username was blocked before creating my account. A user Shaan Sengupta filed an SPI. He alleged that he found he found many similarities with that account in the user account. He asked how I could know Bengali as I live in Delhi and Marxist's native language is Bengali. I knew basic Bengal as I studied at Burdwan Medical College MBBS. Marxist alleged he has a PhD in Physics from Jadavpur University. He also alleged I write in capital letters sometimes as another sockpuppet of Marxist. I write in capital letters for one day to highlight a letter. He also alleged that I mostly on Indian politics pages as Marxist Economics. I had little contribution to science-related pages. He also alleged I am not a communist but I'm not I'm liberal. Yes in my college days I was associated with SFI as in Bengal communism has a good presence. Marxist born in 2004 but I was born in 2000. Marxist has a B+ blood group but I have an O+ blood group. If I'm comparable to that account why not Shaan Sengupta he has many similarities though both of them edit mainly political articles at the same time have the same blood group and were born in the same year. I have carefully observed their respective user pages. So, please apple me. So, that I can contribute in Wikipedia.
Decline reason:
Your claims as to the differences in user pages is not remotely convincing; we have no way of independently verifying what you wrote or what another user wrote about your blood type, etc., is accurate. Nor do you address the evidence presented at
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marxist Economist. In any case, Confirmed sockpuppetry across multiple IP address ranges.
Yamla (
talk)
11:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)reply
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the
guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.