User talk:Milk Mead

Hello, Milk Mead! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.

Getting Started Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Get help at the Teahouse Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions Department directory Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Discord server • IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper) Things to do Task Center • Be bold in editing Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 21:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page 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, 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you 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.

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.

Ekdalian (talk) 12:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Please do not make future edits such as this one, in which you selectively remove content relating to the aforementioned South Asia contentious topic without discussion and consensus. As you're presumed to be aware given the above notification, the topic of Indian military history was placed under the extended-confirmed restriction; you're not extended-confirmed and removing content relating to military operations in Kashmir falls under the topic of Indian military history, so you should not be editing this content at all. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 19:25, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Swatjester: This seems an entirely mistaken warning. Milk Mead's rationale for removing this content from the infobox as noted in the edit summary was that it was too minor an operation to be worth noting in the infobox. This is correct. The source also obviously didn't support the claim being made, given it says that Delta Force was hunting Bin Laden in Kashmir, and not that the force was taking part in the broader conflict in the area as the infobox was claiming. As such, the edit was actually removing misleading and potentially inflammatory content. I'd suggest that you strike this warning. Nick-D (talk) 22:35, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

No. The subject matter of the edit is clearly within the bounds of a contentious topic area with an active sanction that states non-extended confirmed editors are not welcome to edit that topic area. Period. This is a brightline exclusion, that applies whether the underlying edit was correct or not — ArbCom has decided that is irrelevant due to the level of disruption in the topic space. You're welcome to endorse the edit yourself and revert it if you agree with it, but Milk Mead is not and I will not be striking this. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 22:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC) ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 22:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I'll add that the source is not as clear cut as you're stating about their purpose being hunting Bin Laden. It states that Bin Laden was being sheltered by "Kashmiri separatist groups including Harkat-ul-Mujahideen" and that the joint operation was also targeting those elements, which means the source does in fact appear to support the claim. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 23:07, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

This looks like an example of using ArbCom to bludgeon new editors who are actually making helpful edits as they made the edit here an hour before the templated warning was posted above to notify them of the ArbCom restrictions. You don't need to treat other people like this, and I'd suggest that you be more courteous. Nick-D (talk) 23:44, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Except it wasn't a helpful edit. By definition, ArbCom has determined that is categorically the case and disallowed that class of edits from that class of editor. Whether or not you disagree with the outcome of the case doesn't change the fact that it exists -- you're welcome not to edit the topic if you disagree or find yourself incapable of constructively editing within the topic space. I have no idea why you're deciding to pick a fight over this, but perhaps you missed the part where the source actually does support the claim -- something you neglected to mention at first and failed to address when I brought it up. So really, this is starting to look like an example of you casting unfounded WP:ASPERSIONs. You don't need to treat other people like this, and I'd suggest that *you* be more courteous. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 00:51, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I think it clearly was a helpful edit, and was accurately described by Milk Mead in their edit summary. Drop the tedious counter attack tactics. Nick-D (talk) 01:13, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Again, it's irrelevant whether it was a helpful edit or not. They are categorically not allowed to make it. Full stop. End of story. You're perfectly well aware of this and I've already made it clear I'm not striking the warning. Move on and find something better to do with your time. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 01:30, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

As a fellow admin, I think that it's disappointing that you're behaving in this high handed way. I was mistaken about the ArbCom notification coming after the edit by the way - sorry about that. Nick-D (talk) 01:55, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

This isn't a contentious issue. I removed a news article, not a references of an official document or primary literature. Instead of gatekeeping and relying on page politics, try to read the article to better understand the intent behind edits. My goal was to keep uniformity in the infobox. There was no indication on the scope of particular operations mentioned in the article which specifically details Delta Forces role. I am not claiming nor denying that Delta Force didn't have involvement in the Kashmir Insurgency. However, why not list every military involvement and global incident since the inception of the force? The infobox doesn't even reference the Insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa which entailed direct involvement, instead it focuses on The Battle of Tora Bora. The other content in the infobox have defined operations, the only thing I've been selective on was removing content that doesn't fall within the scope of the article. Milk Mead (talk) 08:47, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

You are already aware of the discretionary sanctions! You need to 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. If you violate the same, you will be reported. Be careful! It's not about whether your edits are right or wrong; it's more about the rule! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 12:13, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Ekdalian, thanks for your irrelevant reminder. Instead of listing it as 1) Indian and 2) Other nations in South Asia. You could save ppl time and say South Asian to begin with. Yet yet again, I don't care about your pathetic page politics. The fact that you use this as a confirmation for this debate instead of academic and scholarly articles speaks more about your stance. Reactive and discretionary. Milk Mead (talk) 09:36, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Also I'm not aware about these laughable sanctions. Did I hurt your feelings so much with a signal edit that it resorted to such response? Yet you cry and rely on ageism for credibility? Work on your academic integrity and others maybe align with you. Seems like you're trying to claim seniority based on edits instead of credentials. You simply failed to provide an alternative that proved your point instead of basing your entire stance on a single new article and Wiki discussion. I may have less edits then you yet more knowledge and common sense. Milk Mead (talk) 09:47, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paleo-Indians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:59, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

How is it incorrect you illiterate ape bot? You're using linked to a specific etymology idiot. Milk Mead (talk) 10:58, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Maurya Empire, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 11:38, 2 November 2025 (UTC)