Chaudharys-3591
Welcome!
|
Chaudharys-3591, you are invited to the Teahouse! edit
|
Hi Chaudharys-3591! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC) |
May 2015 edit
Hello, I'm Sitush. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Farooq Abdullah, 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! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sitush (talk) 09:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, you are adding or altering information at numerous articles so that they mention the Gurjars. The problem is that your changes are either not sourced or are in contradiction to the sources that are already present. Wikipedia requires that more or less every statement made in an article is verifiable (click on that link for an explanation). More, the statements must be verifiable by reference to a reliable source, not just your own knowledge or, for example, a samaj website created by some caste members.
- It is because you are not complying with these requirements that all of your contributions are being reverted by me and other people. It is great that you want to add to the knowledge that Wikipedia gives to the world but we do have policies for a reason and you do need to follow them.
- Feel free to ask any questions if there is something that you do not understand. - Sitush (talk) 14:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Gurjara-Pratihara. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, 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 editing privileges. 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 lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Sitush (talk) 04:58, 23 May 2015 (UTC) You are Tempering with the history
Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Gopa Rashtra. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. —MelbourneStar☆talk 05:47, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
ARBIPA notification edit
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.May 2015 edit
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Gurjara-Pratihara, you may be blocked from editing. You have been told many times not to add original research into this article and other similar articles. You should stop now. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Gurjar. --NeilN talk to me 11:32, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
- And you have just done it again. What is it that you do not understand regarding our policies of verifiability and neutrality, and our requirement for reliable sources? You are going to find yourself blocked if you continue in this manner. - Sitush (talk) 06:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
July 2015 edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. —SpacemanSpiff 13:13, 8 July 2015 (UTC)