User talk:Bichakana

Your edits to Amhara people

Dear Bichakana, welcome to Wikipedia! I had reverted one of your edits on Amhara people, which you have now reverted in turn, so I find it now necessary to explain why I reverted the edit in the first place. The English Wikipedia in all its articles follows the usage of the English language when writing about things when there is an English name available. For example, the selfname of Germans is 'Deutsche', but because there is an English word for referring to Germans, this word is used on Wikipedia. Now this is also true for the Amhara people, which in English in a shorter form are referred to as Amharas (as a quick Google search will reveal to you). There is also an adjective Amharan in English, which is rarely used as a qualifier for things or concepts related to the Amhara people, but not to the people themselves. Please do not reinstate this faulty use of English on Wikipedia, as this will be seen as disruptive behaviour. Your editing career on Wikipedia will be long and happy (I hope) if you follow the rules that govern this place, but if you strike other editors and even administrators as being disruptive, they will begin to apply sanctions against you. Landroving Linguist (talk) 00:03, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear editor, I can see your logic in which argued against my usage of the term Amharan but if you see in the Tigrayan language, the term Amharay is used to refer to a member of the Amharan ethnicity which roughly corresponds to the English word Amharan, thus I will re-insert the term as an alternative name. Bichakana (talk) 08:51, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for starting to discuss this matter. Again, the use of language in the English Wikipedia should entirely reflect what English speakers would do, so the use of Tigrayan speakers in the Tigrayan language has no bearing on that. Different languages have different ways to express things. The only exception to that would be if the usage in English would be perceived as insulting by the people talked about, but that is clearly not the case with the use of Amharas. My advice to you is that you acquaint yourself with the most important regulations of Wikipedia, before you continue editing. This tutorial is an excellent place to start. Landroving Linguist (talk) 10:56, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

February 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Amhara people. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, 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 their editing privileges on that page. 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 result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:15, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Battle of Wayna Daga; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Rsk6400 (talk) 06:15, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bichakana. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:15, 24 February 2021 (UTC)