Welcome!
Hello, Alxndrdegrt, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
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
New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{
helpme}}
on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!-- Mishae ( talk) 20:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Re: this . Please see the article talk page and seek a consensus before attempting any such changes in the future. There have been discussions in the past over this very issue and it may be worth your time to look those over. Also there are several files, links, templates ect. on all articles that are sensitive to any change to their syntax, so the spelling with those must stay as is regardless. Your changes resulted in several broken files and links, so I reverted your entire edit. Thank you. -- RacerX11 Talk to me Stalk me 22:28, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to
Satwant Singh, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some
guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. §§
Dharmadhyaksha§§ {
T/
C}
10:24, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Please consider reverting or changing these two edits, as they are arguably making the article worse: you distorted the meaning of the passage, effectively hiding the fact he spoke no or only a little Hindi (this may not be noteworthy to you, but it clearly is to the general reader in light of the prominence and also controversial nature of Hindi in India – certainly more so than the "Sleeping Gowda" fluff, with which you seem to have no issues); also, due to your edits, the remark in brackets and the carefully prepared references – which demonstrate the relevance of this information and you might want to read – make no sense now; employing "which" twice in such close succession is bad style and it's second usage is ungrammatical, anyway, not to mention the missing parenthetical structuring; it's "Hindi", not "hindi". Thanks, regards – ὁ οἶστρος ( talk) 15:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Prime Minister does not know Hindi and there is nothing to be ashamed of it. He need not have apologised to the nation for his lack of command over Hindi. His attitude was an affront to the dignity and wisdom of the non-Hindi population of India, since he spoke as though one cannot live in India if he does not know Hindi. This shows he is only a prisoner of the Hindi domination of the front (or back), and is keen to keep his chair intact at any cost.
He will do well to remember that he is the Prime Minister to non-Hindi speaking people of India also. It is such chicanery and foolishness of the leaders of the South that is self-defeating and is to be condemned.
K. Ramachandra Rao, a reader of Indian Express, says Deve Gowda's decision to learn Hindi is not a step in the right direction. No Prime Minister hitherto has bothered to learn Tamil, Kannada, Malayalam or Bengali, although these languages are as much national languages as Hindi.
When earlier Prime Ministers visited non-Hindi-speaking States, they would address the people in Hindi or in English. Similarly, Deve Gowda should speak either in English or Kannada on State visits.
Gowda's effort to learn Hindi is tantamount to showing disrespect to the other Indian languages and also placing Hindi on a pedestal higher than that of the other languages. [...]
Your edits of
Himalayas were reverted as the name change has been discussed on many previous occasions and the consensus has been that the common use of the name is with a final 's'. See
here and
here.
Apuldram (
talk)
13:30, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent, without citing a
reliable source. Please review the guidelines at
Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Also, you don't add any edit summaries and you're
warring on top of that. -
LouisAragon (
talk)
18:33, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 04:39, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent. 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.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. Kautilya3 ( talk) 09:53, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
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.Kautilya3 ( talk) 09:54, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
Himani Savarkar without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Kautilya3 (
talk)
11:48, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ThePlatypusofDoom. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of
your recent contributions —the one you made with
this edit to
Ashish Khetan— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
ThePlatypusofDoom
(talk)
14:12, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Crisco 1492. I'm not involved in edit war here. The changes I've made have been based on accurate sources from reputed news outlets. The page as it stood earlier was downright intellectually dishonest & driven by coreligionist agenda. The changes I brought about have proper sources/references. - Alxndrdegrt
Hi Chris WoodrichI fail to understand why this has be so controversial. The matter is straightforward. I don't have a preferred version here. I have simply brought balance to the page by bringing forward more facts which are backed up with reputed sources/references. As to why those edits are being removed, I can only speculate. My first edit was on 16th September. User:Jkadavoor specifically targeted those changes thereafter. He has never edited/shown interest in that page before I made those edits. Why now? It makes no sense as to why he should be irked by those specific changes. Those edits are relevant to the whole case. Take it up with him. Ask him why he is undoing it. User:Alxndrdegrt
Hello, I'm
Kautilya3. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
Pravin Togadia without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Kautilya3 (
talk)
13:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Jim1138. I noticed that in
this edit to
Old Tamil language, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Jim1138 (
talk)
06:53, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
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 that 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.Doug Weller talk 17:26, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at
Rani Padmini, you may be
blocked from editing. Thank you.
utcursch |
talk
10:22, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
The following sanction now applies to you:
Indefinitely topic banned from any content related to India (including but not limited to history, mythology, religion, people) across all areas of the English Wikipedia
You have been sanctioned for long term disruptive editing in this space coupled with a failure to cooperate with other editors and heed warnings.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. — Spaceman Spiff 11:05, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at
Rani Padmini.
utcursch |
talk
11:07, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Alxndrdegrt, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
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
New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{
helpme}}
on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!-- Mishae ( talk) 20:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Re: this . Please see the article talk page and seek a consensus before attempting any such changes in the future. There have been discussions in the past over this very issue and it may be worth your time to look those over. Also there are several files, links, templates ect. on all articles that are sensitive to any change to their syntax, so the spelling with those must stay as is regardless. Your changes resulted in several broken files and links, so I reverted your entire edit. Thank you. -- RacerX11 Talk to me Stalk me 22:28, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to
Satwant Singh, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some
guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. §§
Dharmadhyaksha§§ {
T/
C}
10:24, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Please consider reverting or changing these two edits, as they are arguably making the article worse: you distorted the meaning of the passage, effectively hiding the fact he spoke no or only a little Hindi (this may not be noteworthy to you, but it clearly is to the general reader in light of the prominence and also controversial nature of Hindi in India – certainly more so than the "Sleeping Gowda" fluff, with which you seem to have no issues); also, due to your edits, the remark in brackets and the carefully prepared references – which demonstrate the relevance of this information and you might want to read – make no sense now; employing "which" twice in such close succession is bad style and it's second usage is ungrammatical, anyway, not to mention the missing parenthetical structuring; it's "Hindi", not "hindi". Thanks, regards – ὁ οἶστρος ( talk) 15:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Prime Minister does not know Hindi and there is nothing to be ashamed of it. He need not have apologised to the nation for his lack of command over Hindi. His attitude was an affront to the dignity and wisdom of the non-Hindi population of India, since he spoke as though one cannot live in India if he does not know Hindi. This shows he is only a prisoner of the Hindi domination of the front (or back), and is keen to keep his chair intact at any cost.
He will do well to remember that he is the Prime Minister to non-Hindi speaking people of India also. It is such chicanery and foolishness of the leaders of the South that is self-defeating and is to be condemned.
K. Ramachandra Rao, a reader of Indian Express, says Deve Gowda's decision to learn Hindi is not a step in the right direction. No Prime Minister hitherto has bothered to learn Tamil, Kannada, Malayalam or Bengali, although these languages are as much national languages as Hindi.
When earlier Prime Ministers visited non-Hindi-speaking States, they would address the people in Hindi or in English. Similarly, Deve Gowda should speak either in English or Kannada on State visits.
Gowda's effort to learn Hindi is tantamount to showing disrespect to the other Indian languages and also placing Hindi on a pedestal higher than that of the other languages. [...]
Your edits of
Himalayas were reverted as the name change has been discussed on many previous occasions and the consensus has been that the common use of the name is with a final 's'. See
here and
here.
Apuldram (
talk)
13:30, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent, without citing a
reliable source. Please review the guidelines at
Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Also, you don't add any edit summaries and you're
warring on top of that. -
LouisAragon (
talk)
18:33, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 04:39, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent. 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.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. Kautilya3 ( talk) 09:53, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
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.Kautilya3 ( talk) 09:54, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
Himani Savarkar without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Kautilya3 (
talk)
11:48, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ThePlatypusofDoom. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of
your recent contributions —the one you made with
this edit to
Ashish Khetan— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
ThePlatypusofDoom
(talk)
14:12, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Crisco 1492. I'm not involved in edit war here. The changes I've made have been based on accurate sources from reputed news outlets. The page as it stood earlier was downright intellectually dishonest & driven by coreligionist agenda. The changes I brought about have proper sources/references. - Alxndrdegrt
Hi Chris WoodrichI fail to understand why this has be so controversial. The matter is straightforward. I don't have a preferred version here. I have simply brought balance to the page by bringing forward more facts which are backed up with reputed sources/references. As to why those edits are being removed, I can only speculate. My first edit was on 16th September. User:Jkadavoor specifically targeted those changes thereafter. He has never edited/shown interest in that page before I made those edits. Why now? It makes no sense as to why he should be irked by those specific changes. Those edits are relevant to the whole case. Take it up with him. Ask him why he is undoing it. User:Alxndrdegrt
Hello, I'm
Kautilya3. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
Pravin Togadia without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Kautilya3 (
talk)
13:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Jim1138. I noticed that in
this edit to
Old Tamil language, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an
edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Jim1138 (
talk)
06:53, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
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 that 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.Doug Weller talk 17:26, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at
Rani Padmini, you may be
blocked from editing. Thank you.
utcursch |
talk
10:22, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
The following sanction now applies to you:
Indefinitely topic banned from any content related to India (including but not limited to history, mythology, religion, people) across all areas of the English Wikipedia
You have been sanctioned for long term disruptive editing in this space coupled with a failure to cooperate with other editors and heed warnings.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. — Spaceman Spiff 11:05, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at
Rani Padmini.
utcursch |
talk
11:07, 31 January 2017 (UTC)