Welcome!Edit

Hi GauravMaP! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! –– 𝚅𝚁𝙹𝙱𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚑𝚞 16:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

June 2021Edit

  Hello, I'm Dan arndt. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to Talk:Adam's Bridge. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. This is the 'English Wikipedia' not a 'Global Wikipedia' and therefore the names reflect the commonly used English name not the Hindu name. Also anyone is free to edit articles on Wikipedia and it is not limited to individuals of a particularly nationality or religious belief. Finally do not assume that I am not Hindu/Indian/Sri Lankan, just because I reside in Australia. Dan arndt (talk) 02:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC) Dan arndt (talk) 02:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kasur. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 10:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

  Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Lahore, you may be blocked from editing. - Arjayay (talk) 10:25, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

  You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Revocation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir. -- DaxServer (talk) 11:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

InformationEdit

 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 India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. 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.

June 2021Edit

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.
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 ~~~~}}.  Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:55, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

GauravMaP (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I was blocked indefinitely for just one day of editing. I could have been blocked for a fews days or months as a warning. But why was I blocked indefinitely directly? I didnt know the rules of adding sources. Please unblock me this time. I promise to be responsible next time. GauravMaP (talk) 12:22, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You were not blocked for just one day of editing, but a general pattern of disruptive behavior that indicates you are here to push an agenda and not civilly collaborate with others, regardless of their views or experiences, on building this encyclopedia. You received several warnings above, but persisted. If users appear to not be interested in building this project, they are blocked indefinitely. I would have done the same thing in this case. As you have not provided anything to suggest that your behavior will change, there are no grounds to remove the block, and as such I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 12:43, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

GauravMaP (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I wont do it again. It I do it again the plz block me permanently. I promise to be more responsible. I will read the rules too GauravMaP (talk) 12:51, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You are expected to read the rules before you start editing, and most certainly need to do so before being unblocked. Frankly, the fact that you still haven't done so demonstrates to me that you aren't operating in good faith. Yamla (talk) 13:17, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

GauravMaP (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

I have now read the rules. I promise to be more responsible. Also, Whatever I edited was not wrong, u can all verify those details. Those pages were filled with wrong information. I can prove it. For example, the region of Gilgit-Baltistan was named as kasmhir!! which is technically wrong. I did nothing wrong. Still I am apologising. Yes I overdid some editing. That i agree. But still those pages were more wrong than my editing. If this is what wikipedia is all about; not allowing bold and true edits. Then plz let me remain blocked. If u think My edits were right, unblock me. Any person who knows about jammu and kashmir, knows my edits were right GauravMaP (talk) 17:58, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Your request does not address the reasons for your block, your block reason is: "Clearly not here to build an encyclopedia - blatantly biased edits with deceptive edit summaries, never citing reliable sources, and personal attacks". HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 11:59, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

GuaravMaP, it's clear you haven't even read the guide to appealing blocks, much less the various other policies you were violating. Every time you post yet another bad unblock request, you're wasting other editors' time. If you post another bad unblock request that does not follow the advice at WP:GAB, someone will quite likely revoke your access to this talk page to prevent you from doing it again and wasting more people's time with these repeated requests. I recommend you read the advice several times, all of it, and if you aren't absolutely sure you understand exactly how to write a good unblock request, read the advice again. —valereee (talk) 15:04, 5 June 2021 (UTC)