Prasanthnnamboothiri

Welcome!

Hello, Prasanthnnamboothiri, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Potti, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Tea House, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Tauhid (talk) 08:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Potti

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Potti requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Tauhid (talk) 08:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Brahmin article

Hi, I know that you mean well at the Brahmin article but it would be better to discuss the issues than keep reinstating material that has now been removed by three different people. Wikipedia has something called the bold, revert, discuss cycle. It's not a policy but it is generally thought to be good practice. So, you were bold in adding the material (no problem, it is encouraged) but once you were reverted your next step should have been to discuss at Talk:Brahmin if you still believe that you were correct.

Don't panic about it: you seem to be new here and all of us were once! What I suggest that you do is try to spend a bit of time reading our policy here about what constitutes a reliable source. Then, if you still think your additions were ok or if you do not understand something, go to the article talk page. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Your recent editing history at Brahmin shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dougweller (talk) 14:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

You've been reverted by 3 editors. You are doing what we call edit-warring and if you revert again will probably be blocked, which would be a shame. You've got to get agreement now on the talk page. Dougweller (talk) 14:17, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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:Prasanthnnamboothiri reported by User:Dougweller (Result: ). Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 14:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for abuse of editing privileges, as you did at Brahmin. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Bbb23 (talk) 14:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)