User talk:Cdr. Erwin Smith

Hi there, Cdr. Erwin Smith – please note that as a new user, you are not allowed to make edits concerning Indian military history until your account has at least 500 edits and is at least 30 days old. You are allowed to make edit requests on the talk pages of articles, but any other substantive editing in that topic area (probably including taking your current dispute with Slatersteven and SheriffIsInTown to ANI) would be a violation of that restriction. This doesn't necessarily mean that there are any problems with your editing (other than editing in violation of the restriction you didn't know about), just a note of a blanket rule that keeps you from contributing in this topic area until you gain experience in other ones. Thanks, theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 14:50, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I've only made edit requests in this ongoing topic, since it's edit protected anyway. Regarding the dispute resolution, I was recommended to do so by the page admin, so I guess I'm clear in this aspect. Regards. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 15:04, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

If you're referring to the person who told you to go to ANI in removing the arbitration request, that page admin would be me. It was my mistake to not mention it in the removal, but still, please note that taking the case to ANI would be a violation of the extended-confirmed restriction. The best thing you can do right now is to disengage from the topic area and come back sometime after you 500 edits. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 15:08, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

No ma'am, I was talking about the page admin of the page in which the dispute is taking place.^[1] Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 15:19, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

theleekycauldron is actually correct here: per the recent WP:CT/SA case, closed on July 18, non-XC editors are no longer allowed to discuss Indian military history topics, including the recent conflict. You should disengage from said topic for now. In my comments on the talk page, I didn't realize that you were not yet XC. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:21, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Are you trying to get a ban, you have been told to stop, yet continue to act like a wp:spa. Slatersteven (talk) 09:00, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

A new day, a new blame.

I have a specific expertise in weapons, and I've made several edits in this domain for multiple countries, with neutrality.

USA : LRASM Range Addition

India : BrahMos Speed+Range Manipulation

Israel : MF-STAR T/R Module

EU : Meteor Range Correction

As you can see, I didn't stand the Indian weapon's manipulation either. So no, I'm not here to push any agenda. Why don't you show some neutrality on your behalf, and stick to your 'only 3rd party' stance after adding IAF claims ? Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 19:56, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

I have never added any claims. Slatersteven (talk) 11:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

But you didn't stop them either, like you're doing now. That's why those claims are still there, but this one isn't. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 12:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I have explained my opinion, if you do not accept it tough, now I suggest you follow the advice and stop. Slatersteven (talk) 11:01, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I note you have still not walked away. Slatersteven (talk) 11:14, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

As it stands, I can make requests without taking part in the discussion. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 12:04, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

If you respond to any post, that is participation in a discussion, see WP:LAWYERING. Slatersteven (talk) 09:48, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

You have recently made edits 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. This is a standard message to inform you that 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 is a designated contentious topic.

Additionally, editors 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.

This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. TarnishedPath^talk 15:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

In response to your request for arbitration, the Arbitration Committee has decided that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.

In all cases, you should review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact me or a member of the community if you have more questions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:28, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Talk:2025 India–Pakistan conflict, Talk:2025 India–Pakistan crisis, Talk:Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts, 2025 India–Pakistan conflict, 2025 India–Pakistan crisis, and Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts) for continued attempts to discuss Indian military history topics despite prior warnings.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:18, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm rather surprised to see you continue to try to engage in discussion at the above pages after your prior commitment to disengage. Please note that the above is an Arbitration Enforcement sanction, and thus any appeal must follow the instructions at WP:AEBLOCK in addition to the more general advice already linked in the template. I would also recommend reading WP:ECREXPLAIN. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:20, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, although you informed me of the intricacies a bit too fast ! Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 16:56, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Your addition to BEML has been removed or altered, as it appears to closely paraphrase a copyrighted source. Limited close paraphrasing or quotation is appropriate within reason, so long as the material is clearly attributed in the text. However, longer paraphrases, especially if they are not attributed to their source, may constitute copyright violation and/or plagiarism, and are not acceptable on Wikipedia. Such content cannot be hosted here for legal reasons; please do not post it on any page, even if you plan to fix it later. You may use external websites or printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If you own the copyright to the text, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the copyright but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.

Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Yuvaank (talk) 00:40, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the prior information.

I will add an edited version accordingly. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 07:47, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Just so you know, the real name of {{tq}} is Template:Talk quote inline, and you really should only use it when you are actually quoting someone. If you just want to highlight something, use italics or bold, or if you really think color is necessary, use one of the text color templates. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:31, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I wasn't aware of this 🙏 Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 03:35, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

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).

Cdr. Erwin Smith (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

Hello, I was barred from 3 articles and their talk pages. A lot of time has passed, and since then I've learned and contributed a lot in the Village Pump^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]}, contributed in different articles across differing dimensions like BEML, AMCA, 2025 Asia Cup, Bullseye, Sea Breaker, Euroradar CAPTOR, RBE2, Khamzat Chimaev, Uttam AESA Radar, Spike, performed a lot of page maintenance, as well as Self-RVed^[10][11] after learning about the specifics of the rule.^[12].

Lastly, although it's not that important, I believe a direct indefinite ban was a bit hasty, since I was getting conflicting signals from two different admins^[13][14], and was only told about the specifics of the rule after the block.^[15] I know it was my responsibility to know everything from the beginning, but WP:KUDZU should be considered too. Still I won't blame anybody, and I decided to respect the ban until I became an ECU.

Thanks for bearing with me !

Decline reason:

Per below. There are still concerns about your editing and understanding of Wikipedia rules/policies, and we are not convinced at this time that your involvement in WP:CT/SA topics (which are typically extremely heated and polarizing) is going to be a good thing for both you and us. Sohom (talk) 07:57, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

---

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.

Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 15:59, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

I will ping @Rosguill here as the blocking admin, however, I am a) concerned that you will relapse into discussing WP:CT/SA topics in a manner that. The fact that even within a month and a bit, you've had to self-revert topic ban violations, and literally days after gaining WP:Extended confirmed rights, you started editing Uttam AESA Radar, Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft etc does not fill me with confidence about your future editing. b) You've demonstrated that you are still somewhat unfamiliar with the rules of the encyclopedia, as evidenced by the copyright violation notices above and your use of AI to reply to a village pump discussion in direct violation of WP:LLMTALK. As such I would recommend declining at this time. Sohom (talk) 04:43, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

@Sohom Datta: I think your assessment here is correct. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:18, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

It seems my reply time window ran out and I wasn't aware of it. Still I'll explain my case.

• Yes, I used an LLM. But as I said in the reply, I duly checked it multiple times, and even modified it before posting. I also gave a clear disclaimer about the usage of AI in my reply. If someone has seen my stance regarding AI, I advocate for its usage^[16] in most areas (except AfD^[17] for it potential misuse). That's why I decided to test it once in good faith on a complex topic. Even then, I suggested stopping as soon as the other person raised a question on it. The rest of the conversation was carried out by me without the usage of AI. Besides this one brief instance, all the rest of my conversations in the Village Pump, both in the past and the future of this brief occasion, were done manually by me. So please WP:AGF in this case.
• As I've stated, I wasn't totally clear about the entire scope of the MilHist restriction. Once I got clear on this through an Admin, I Self-RVed.
• I edited those articles because I'm an expert in this field, and I was allowed to do so after becoming an ECU. I've written multiple articles in a leading military website and it's of my particular interest for the past decade. So naturally I'll edit mostly in this sector, not in bad faith but because I'm confident about my good knowledge in this field. If you check any of my edits in this field, none of them were in violation of any Wiki policy. As a matter of fact, even the RfC for which I was blocked^[18] was very carefully worded for not breaching WP:NPoV, as also noted by another ECU.^[19][20] I would've never gotten blocked in the first place if I knew about the specifics of the rule.

Thanks for your time @Sohom! Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 12:56, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello Cdr. Erwin Smith. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Navi Mumbai International Airport, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Cdr. Erwin Smith. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Cdr. Erwin Smith|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Charlie (talk) 09:16, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Charlie !

I was just typing a message in your talk page for clarification in this regard. Thanks for saving me the trouble !

For the answer to your question, no, I wasn't paid anything to make that edit, or for that matter any of the edits that I've published in Wikipedia till date.

I edit mostly in the sector of military weaponry, apart from contributing to the village pump. As for my edit in the Navi Mumbai International Airport, I have no problems in its reversion because of a relevant policy violation. But the one cited currently is not correct.

Thank you for your time! Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 09:55, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Curious what led you to Varanasi (2027 film) since you "edit mostly in the sector of military weaponry." --CNMall41 (talk) 08:04, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Please state clearly what you're inferring.

I can edit wherever I'm permitted to inside Wikipedia. I'm also editing in multiple other articles simultaneously.

Some of my edits in other spheres :

• Arattai
• Ol Doinyo Lengai
• Asia Cup 2025

Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 10:54, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Not inferring. I asked a direct question. You don't have to answer. I will say that it raises eyebrows based on similar conduct in Ramayana. Note your talk page messages as well as I did not come here out of thin air. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Why a direct question didn't even have a question mark (?) in it ?

The fact that I edit mostly out of this sphere instead of gooning there 24*7 should've lowered your eyebrows instead of raising them. The parent message regarding Paid Edit Disclosure was a baseless allegation made by someone who left the relevant talk page once I started giving replies and demanding answers.

Your message looked like a cynical poke, so I addressed it as such. If I didn't answer, other admins going through my talk page for formal purposes would've gotten the wrong impression that I didn't answer due to my fear and guilty conscience.

Ignore if you didn't mean it as such. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 10:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

@Cdr. Erwin Smith No one has left the talk page at NMIA. I felt your replies weren't clear enough, so I decided to step back for a moment and let some more experienced editors join in and help. I had a hard time understanding your edits and your approach on Wikipedia. I think @CNMall41 feels the same way, or at least very similar. Charlie (talk) 17:11, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

You literally left quickly my man.

But whatever, everyone has limited time to spend in Wiki, including you and me. Idc about NMIA anymore. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 18:46, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

My reply is in the deletion discussion. Your conduct is similar to that of at least one other account from a previous deletion discussion of the same topic. I am not here on a whim. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:40, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Also, do NOT change someone's comments at AfD. If it is an error, you can point it out and they can strike and change if appropriate. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:52, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

You are acting just like the person before. So I'll ask you the same question I asked him.

Please state clearly which specific policy did my replies violate. Otherwise you're biting me needlessly and wasting both of our time.

As for that edit, it was clearly a minor typo that I fixed, a harmless inconsequential edit which won't alter the course of the conversation. We do it quite a lot in the Village Pump.

But the fact that you're seeing it as a hostile act and shouting at me for it, shows you're still not assuming good faith. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 05:24, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

No one is shouting. As stated in the AfD, the conduct here is similar to another afd which I pointed out (after you mentioned it) in the discussion. If you have an issue with me asking a question, please report me. The fact you are becoming hostile and accusing me or biting is telling. --CNMall41 (talk) 08:43, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

The reason I mentioned Ramayana was only to show one perspective of notability, that is the budget. That wasn't the only pillar my argument was based on. I have nothing to do with the AfDs of Ramayana, neither did I participate in any of them.

For the rest, I've already made my stance clear. Since you couldn't cite any policy violations, there's no point prolonging this conversation. Goodbye. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 10:30, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

@4-RAZOR 01 @Aviator Jr it's just to inform you that I've updated the range of the aforementioned missiles as per the latest updates given by DRDO scientists to India TV.

But since a large portion of these interviews are in Hindi, it would be great if you add some quality english news articles as additional sources, as and when available. By quality, I mean Alpha Defence, ToI, Defence Matrix, HT, The Hindu, Indian Express or as such. I would like to avoid articles/websites with makeshift-type heading banners like IDN for credibility purposes outside India. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 18:31, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Roger that i will see to it 4-RΔ𝚉🌑R-01𝕏 (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Much appreciated ! Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 08:34, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

I was thinking of adding the set of upgrades on the respective articles since it was confirmed by two DRDO scientists themselves. But neither IndiaTV nor other reliable sources gave any articles English or Hindi which can be added as supporting citations. I will add a reliable citation later if they are published. Until then the YouTube citation must be converted with Cite AV media template along with a tweet I have found. Thanks. Aviator Jr (talk) 05:03, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much !

Btw I didn't update the range of Astra Mk.1, because unlike Mk.2, it's an in-service missile and it wouldn't be fair to update its range unless it's test fired atleast once. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 08:37, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

I will not update its range as 160 km in the infobox. But I think no problem will be there if we add details of its further range extensions in the somewhere else in the article. Aviator Jr (talk) 09:18, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, no problems with the body. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 11:22, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Teahouse, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

1. Meaning wasn't changed.

2. Quoted parts weren't changed.

3. None of them were irritated.

Thank you. Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 11:58, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

How do you know that no one was irritated? Regardless, please refrain from editing other users' comments in future. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:11, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I could ask the same question in reverse, since my experience with copyediting in the VP has been quite the opposite.

But anyways, it's not like obliging would cost anything to me. It's a loss for the Teahouse.

Have a good day sir ! Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 12:22, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

It might be the case that you've had positive reactions from some, but that doesn't change the fact that, as stated at WP:TPO, "The basic rule, with exceptions outlined below, is not to edit or remove others' posts without their permission". Cordless Larry (talk) 13:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)