User talk:Ashwin.lamba

September 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
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. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. TheDeviantPro (talk) 10:08, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Comedy Dangal

Hello Ashwin.lamba,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Comedy Dangal for deletion in response to your request.

If you didn't intend to make such a request and don't want the article to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

SamHolt6 (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Vani Rani (2017 TV series)

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 Vani Rani (2017 TV series) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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 "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, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Cahk (talk) 15:58, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Signature on article

Hi Ashwin.lamba, apologies for tagging the wrong user on 'singature on article' message which I have removed. Once again, my apologies. CASSIOPEIA (talk) 17:46, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of current champions in WWE, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Asuka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Hello, I'm Cyphoidbomb. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Race 3 have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Diff: [1] This edit, where you inexplicably remove sourced content, is indistinguishable from vandalism. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at WrestleMania 34. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Azealia911 _talk 08:42, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Race 3. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Diffs: [2] We don't need editors' whimsical observations/complaints registered in articles. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. If you do any more of this, you'll have your editing privileges interrupted. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:00, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Dhadak, you may be blocked from editing. Vivek Ray (talk) 04:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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 ~~~~}}. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:37, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For this and this. Indefinitely doesn't mean forever, but it does mean for the foreseeable future. Since you haven't responded to any of the previous notices or warnings, I want to be sure that you vocalise your understanding of why your edits are problematic before you are unblocked. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request of unblocking

This 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).

Ashwin.lamba (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Now I understand that why I am blocked. It is my mistake to continuously write offensive comments for some persons. I am promising you that I will not repeat same mistake in future

Decline reason:

This is nowhere near sufficient. This wasn't a mistake, this was a deliberate decision on your behalf to harm Wikipedia. Given that you've demonstrated we can't trust you, your promise is meaningless. Yamla (talk) 12:09, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.