Hello, അദ്വൈതൻ and a belated welcome to Wikipedia! I see that you've already been around awhile and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help one 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 interested in learning more about contributing, 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. Happy editing! Rasnaboy (talk) 06:17, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments1 person in discussion
Hello, I'm Arjayay. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Nivin Pauly, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Nivin Pauly, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 21:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Your recent editing history at Nivin Pauly shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - Arjayay (talk) 17:48, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Please stop making repeated unsourced claims about Nivin Pauly's religious background. Any such claims need to be capable of being Verified by your using a citation from a reliable source - Arjayay (talk) 17:51, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Please have a look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources - the blog post that you added here is not a reliable source by Wikipedia standards. You can cite the actual newspaper article mentioned in this blog post instead. utcursch | talk 00:37, 12 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Religion in Kerala have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Religion in Kerala was changed by അദ്വൈതൻ(u)(t) ANN scored at 0.91265 on 2021-06-23T19:39:20+00:00
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Religion in Kerala have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Religion in Kerala was changed by അദ്വൈതൻ(u)(t) ANN scored at 0.958611 on 2021-06-26T12:50:39+00:00
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Religion in Kerala have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Religion in Kerala was changed by അദ്വൈതൻ(u)(t) ANN scored at 0.899758 on 2021-06-28T17:28:26+00:00
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Religion in Kerala. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automaticallyreverted.
If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Religion in Kerala was changed by അദ്വൈതൻ(u)(t) ANN scored at 0.956231 on 2021-06-30T09:48:27+00:00
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
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.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Varna (Hinduism). This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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.WikiLinuz🍁(talk) 05:44, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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.Rasnaboy (talk) 06:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
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 ~~~~}}. PhilKnight (talk) 06:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments2 people in discussion
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 Shiva, 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. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 14:10, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hi അദ്വൈതൻ! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of an article several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 14:10, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hmm I see you have a history of disruptive editing and edit warring. Consider this your final warning. If you still continue to disrupt, you will once again be blocked. Please read the policies linked above and, most importantly, explain your changes on articles' talk pages — DaxServer (t · m · c) 14:12, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
I think this is a clear case of WP:IDHT. They know how to use edit summaries, so it's not like they're not seeing the multiple people telling them about BRD, taking it to talk, etc. I don't see what this person is adding here other than disruption. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 14:34, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
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 ~~~~}}. —C.Fred (talk) 02:43, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
If you wish to continue on Wikipedia, read WP:BRD as a matter of urgency to discover how consensus works here. You have been reverted multiple times and now the onus is on you to make a case for your changes and gain consensus on the article talk pages. If you carry on edit warring you're heading for a permanent block. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 09:21, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Until you removed it in what seems to have been a "fly-by" tagging, the first para of the Marriage in ancient Rome introduction was cited to Scheidel, a highly reputable scholar. You also ought to know (as you've been around for quite some time) that the introductory sections of articles are supposed to function as digests of sourced article content in the main article body, and therefore should only be tagged as needing citation if they do not reflect or summarize the main article content. Thank you. Haploidavey (talk) 20:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
So I've just been through the entire history of the article; unfortunately, access to versions before 6 April 2017 and previous 10 years or so is no longer possible, due to my own detection of a deeply embedded copyright violation between those dates. There's also been substantial link-rot, affecting online access to that particular version of the Scheidel article, and possibly the Treggiari as well; there are several editions and revisions of each, all with differing pagination. At some point, once I've a space between current rewrites, I'll be rewriting the introduction and main article, using whatever good quality sources are available. Thanks again, Haploidavey (talk) 23:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Please re-read the above; it explains how tagging for sources should work. Under the circumstances, your second tagging of the lead sentences in the same article is disruptive. Haploidavey (talk) 08:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
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.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
I have made some edits which incorporates your aditions but preserves most of the material that you removed. If you have further issues with the article please start a discussion on the talk page.★Trekker (talk) 23:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
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.
Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi അദ്വൈതൻ! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Marriage in ancient Rome several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Marriage in ancient Rome, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. 1AmNobody24 (talk) 12:17, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
Your recent editing history at Marriage in ancient Rome shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. SeanTVT (talk) 13:25, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
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 ~~~~}}. — Amakuru (talk) 14:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
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.
Your recent editing history at Marriage in ancient Rome shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NebY (talk) 17:03, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
Hello, I'm Arjayay. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Nivin Pauly, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Nivin Pauly, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 21:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Nivin Pauly, you may be blocked from editing. - Arjayay (talk) 10:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Nivin Pauly. - Arjayay (talk) 17:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Varna (Hinduism). This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:അദ്വൈതൻ reported by User:Moxy (Result: ). Thank you. Moxy-
02:35, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
