User talk:Basavarajitnal

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content please cite a reliable sources for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Why so serious? ^{Talk to me} 11:09, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, Basavarajitnal, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Garuda Mall have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user 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! Why so serious? ^{Talk to me} 11:11, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Garuda Mall has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Why so serious? ^{Talk to me} 09:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your previous edits 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 all account for vandalism. Remember if you reinstate such material into the article again, you may be blocked from editing. Why so serious? ^{Talk to me} 11:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for contravening Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. —SpacemanSpiff 15:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Sorry if i have violated any of edit policies. my contributions were based on a wide range of news features in both local and regional media. i did not know that i had to provide citation of these sources which i will do in subsequent posts. please unblock.

Decline reason:

Per User:Daniel Case, will offer 2nd chance method. -- Cirt (talk) 10:35, 1 February 2011 (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.

How about you post links to the sources you propose to use here first? Right up to the end, you were making some pretty serious accusations there. We'd rather evaluate the reliability of any sources you have to back these allegations up first before we go out and potentially libel someone. Daniel Case (talk) 17:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock declined

This request for unblocking has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Read our guide to improving articles
Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
- If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas.
Click the Edit tab at the top of that article and scroll down past the message informing you of your block.
Copy the source of that article and paste it to the bottom of your talk page under a new top-level heading (like this: = [[Article title]] =) and save the page before you improve it.
Propose some significant and well researched improvements to your article by editing your personal copy of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
- If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{helpme|your question here}}" to your talk page. Thank you.-- Cirt (talk) 10:35, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]