User talk:BlackOrchidd

Welcome!

Hello, BlackOrchidd!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Doug Weller talk 11:26, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Doug Weller talk 11:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A welcome message from your mentor

Hello, BlackOrchidd, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like it here and decide to stay. I'm Asareel, your mentor. Each new Wikipedia account receives a mentor randomly taken from a list of volunteers. It just means I'm here to help with anything you need! You can reach out to me on my talk page if you ever have any questions about editing. Here are some other links you may find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia — Wikipedia's core policies that holds everything together
How to edit — Learn how to make more and even better contributions
Your Homepage — Recommended articles for editing and how you can help improve them!
The Manual of Style — A simplified overview of Wikipedia's formatting and grammar structure
Creating your own article — Learn how to make your own article!

On the off-chance where I'm unavailable, you can ask further questions at the Teahouse, a friendly environment where new users can receive answers from experienced editors. You may also want to check out our public sandbox, where you can make test edits of any kind. Always remember to sign your posts with your username; you do so by placing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. Once again, welcome! --ARose Wolf 14:22, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

can you help me with creating a fancy username BlackOrchidd (talk) 06:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sukama Acharya (April 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Rich Smith was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Sukama Acharya and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

- Rich^T|C|E-Mail 20:57, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BlackOrchidd! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 20:57, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Hello BlackOrchidd! Your additions to Talk:2023 Odisha train collision have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 09:46, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Sukama Acharya

Hello, BlackOrchidd. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sukama Acharya, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:03, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've been whacked with a WikiMinnow..

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you might have done something silly.

Your draft article, Draft:Sukama Acharya

Hello, BlackOrchidd. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Sukama Acharya".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

my bad,i could start it again BlackOrchidd (talk) 05:15, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Hello, I'm Drmies. I noticed that you recently removed content from Mohan Yadav 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 your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. CSECTION means we shouldn't have separate sections; it's not a license to just blank what seems to be verified content. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sections or article titles should generally not include the word "controversies". Instead, titles should simply name the event, for example, "2009 boycott" or "Hunting incident". The word "controversy" should not appear in the title except in the rare situations when it has become part of the commonly accepted name for the event, such as Creation–evolution controversy.BlackOrchidd (talk) 06:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and? You simply blanked the entire section. Drmies (talk) 15:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. I have changed the title from "Controversy" to "Events" Now it looks good. Everyone is happyBlackOrchidd (talk) BlackOrchidd (talk) 04:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm The Herald. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, List of Indian Nobel laureates, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 11:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the process of adding the ref, but the page crashedBlackOrchidd (talk) 10:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bharat Gaurav Trains (December 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mach61 was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please read WP:RSNOI

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bharat Gaurav Trains and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Mach61 (talk) 07:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bharat Nyay Yatra (December 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by InterstellarGamer12321 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bharat Nyay Yatra and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 10:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bharat Nyay Yatra (January 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Aviram7 were:

More reference needed to established notability for this subject.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bharat Nyay Yatra and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 14:09, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Delhi Mohalla Clinic Scam (January 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dcotos was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of events). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please wait for clarity before writing on breaking news. Early coverage is often speculative, allegation newss are not factual as per WP:DELAY, WP:SENSATIONAL.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Delhi Mohalla Clinic Scam and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dcotos (talk) 11:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Narendra Modi, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 07:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"deleting or editing legitimate comments" plz dont post misleading comments. I have neither deleted neither edited this comment. I have only placed it as per the timeline ~~~ BlackOrchidd (talk) 16:21, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

gone through https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:OTHERSCOMMENTS&redirect=no and acknowledged my mistake. Tanks for your correction BlackOrchidd (talk) 16:26, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for understanding — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 21:16, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to The Wire (India). Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 15:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 15:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DaxServer: they were already given the formal CTOP notice in March 2023. If you feel there are issues with their editing, please do say so. The whole point of CTOP is that we deal quickly and strongly with disruptive edits in this area. DMacks (talk) 10:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Wire (India), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andrew Stone. 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) 06:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed warning

I am not restoring the warning I gave you as per WP:NOTWALLOFSHAME, although it seems you generally do not remove warnings issued to you with reason 'housekeeping'. However, as I understand, you have read the warning and are willing not to debate it as you have understood your mistake. Regards, Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 11:41, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that a message you recently left to a newcomer may have been unduly harsh. Please remember not to bite the newcomers. If you see others making a common mistake, consider politely pointing out what they did wrong and showing them how to correct it. It may take some time, but it helps us retain new editors. Thank you.

BlackOrchidd (talk) 15:19, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BlackOrchidd, if any of your edit is perceived to not align with constructivity / Wikipedia guidelines, I will revert that edit and post a warning template on this talk page (for more evidential matters) or a note (for most likely gf edits) so as to notify you about it. There you can discuss if you think the edit was right. If we reach a consensus, you may leave that discussion for archive. This is not biting, just an average procedure here on Wikipedia. Take it in that way. Regards, Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 13:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Smriti Irani. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be 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 noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 11:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Narendra Modi. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. It is time you desist making such attacks on others (Vanamonde, F&f) — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 09:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which attack? This attack diff? Well if that it is, then I must state that Fowler mentioned he was travelling and he published unsubstantiated statements on Narendra Modi TP but without citing referance and further they started posting unrelated comments in Narendra Modi TP on a thread realted with COVID

@DaxServer

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. BlackOrchidd (talk) 10:55, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:Vanamonde93 has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. If you can not understand something, ask. Don't post inappropriate and gratuitous warning templates. —SpacemanSpiff 08:26, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging past editors of Narendra Modi page for an RFC

@Arimaboss @The Account 2 @JackkBrown @I enjoy sandwiches @Lowellian @Lowellian2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Narendra_Modi#%22Request_for_Comment%22

Thanks BlackOrchidd (talk) 15:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Recommended reading: WP:CANVASSING — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 17:16, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt he/she is doing it, but not sure. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 17:18, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was just random users from the history. If @DaxServer has some evidence they can put up BlackOrchidd (talk) 12:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DaxServer just suggested the article, as you are new! I too have changed my comment a bit. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 13:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hounding

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Multiple users keep hounding me on my TP and Narendra Modi TP.

WP:WIKIHOUNDING. Casting WP:ASPERSIONS of canvassing and disruption. Need help to address this issue. BlackOrchidd (talk) 12:35, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't best handled via a help request; grievances about user behavior may be brought to WP:ANI where you should provide diffs to support your claims; be aware that your own actions will be examined as well. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Thanks you for your much helpful response gentleman BlackOrchidd (talk) 05:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Delhi Mohalla Clinic Scam (March 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DMacks was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of events). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Re-submitting an unchanged draft will lead to re-rejection. Please address the noted concerns.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Delhi Mohalla Clinic Scam and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DMacks (talk) 10:55, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balak Ram murti (idol) of the Ram Mandir

Spare me your warning templates diff; I know how Wikipedia works, and I recognize POV-pushers for what they are. See also the warning you received diff from User:SpacemanSpiff for the improper use of warning templates. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

You have recently made edits related to COVID-19, broadly construed. This is a standard message to inform you that COVID-19, broadly construed is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Doug Weller talk 09:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

A cartoon centipede reads books and types on a laptop. — The Wikipede and the Picture Tutorial. *(image credit)*

Welcome!

Hello, BlackOrchidd, and welcome to Wikipedia! I have noticed that you are fairly new! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I also see that some of your recent edits show an interest in the use of images and/or photos on Wikipedia.

Did you know that ...

...Wikipedia has a very stringent image use policy?
...most images from Flickr, online news websites, and other web sources are copyrighted?
...Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously?
...freely-licensed images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, a central location for images where they can be used on all Wikipedia projects?
...we recommend that new users use our "files for upload" process – at least until you get the hang of things?

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 {{Help me}} on your talk 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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! BlackOrchidd (talk) 05:54, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rushing to get to 500 edits the way you have is not acceptable

You even gave yourself a warning and then reverted it. It doesn't appear that you can be trusted with them yet. Doug Weller talk 08:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed user rights revoked

Doug Weller Why my Extended confirmed user rights revoked? BlackOrchidd (talk) 11:54, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided not to ask for a review by someone else but explain more.

The example above, also welcoming yourself after two welcomes and then reverting. In fact a number of self-reverts. Your warning to an experienced editor like User:Daxserver is concerning as it shows both lack of good faith and a tit-for-tat attitude.

Perhaps most worrying is your use of AI to request Rollback, which was appropriately denied. And again at my talk page.

I don't have time for more today. Doug Weller talk 16:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The self-revert on my talk is testing for ultraviolet; I overlooked it for the sandbox. BlackOrchidd (talk) 05:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User talk: Sandbox

Hello, you can use this for testing warnings, other talk page related edits if you want. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 12:17, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Thanks, I need it for testing the newly launched ultraviolet BlackOrchidd (talk) 12:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for a review

See WP:AN#I'd appreciate a review of my decision to remove extended confirmed user rights from an editor.. Doug Weller talk 07:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And two Admins say I was wrong, so restored them. Many apologies. Doug Weller talk 15:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its OK; @Doug Weller there's no need to seek an apology. We all make mistakes. Take care of your health. BlackOrchidd (talk) 04:06, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: North-East India security fence has been accepted

North-East India security fence, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Xegma(talk) 08:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hemant Vishnu Savara (May 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Grabup were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Nomination as a candidate for 2024 General Election does not establish notablity at all, see WP:NPOL, In case of citations, India Today is a press release and the other is unreliable. To meet WP:GNG it needs covarage from multiple secondary reliable sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hemant Vishnu Savara and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Grabup (talk) 09:02, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I note that at your latest revert at the Modi article, your edit summary was "To maintain a neutral point of view (NPOV), we're adjusting this article...". Who is "we"? Black Kite (talk) 18:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody and everybody who stands by NPOVBlackOrchidd (talk) 08:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It may be better if you don't give the impression that there is WP:TAGTEAM editing going on to impose a particular POV, as admins generally take a very dim view of that. Black Kite (talk) 08:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear admin, Unsubstantiated accusations of tag teaming are uncivil @Black Kite. Care should be taken to frame assertions appropriately, citing evidence in the appropriate venues. BlackOrchidd (talk) 10:17, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been an admin here for 17 years, please don't tell me how to communicate. If you'd read my comment carefully, I said "don't give the impression of doing so", I did not say "you have been doing it". And using "we" instead of "I" in an edit summary is definitely giving that impression that you are working with others. Black Kite (talk) 10:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. I was just about to say the same thing but you beat me to it. I agree. Doug Weller talk 13:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

black kite is talking about this diff BlackOrchidd (talk) 08:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Hello, I'm Grabup. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Narendra Modi have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. If you have english sources to cite then cite it, if not found then Hindi sources are enought. GrabUp - Talk 06:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done BlackOrchidd (talk) 07:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Grabup. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Tukde Tukde Gang have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. The RTI reply from the Home Ministry is already mentioned at the Criticism section. GrabUp - Talk 15:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grabup Note that as BlackOrchidd is topic banned they cannot edit anywhere. Pretty sure you didn't know what when you posted as your post came 3 or 4 minutes after the TB notification. You can remove your post and mine if you wish. Doug Weller talk 15:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable source

Hey, I saw that you edited the article Ravish Kumar, where added unreliable sources, refrain from citing unreliable sources to BLP or other articles. Also, don’t add statistics like the ones you included in his article from unreliable sources like SocialBlade.

Your edit diff: Adding of unreliable source, Sidehustleweekend.com.

Socialblade Diff: Here. GrabUp - Talk 17:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plz discusss the reliability of source on WP:RSNBlackOrchidd (talk) 05:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Indian Nobel laureates

Hi, it is regarding the disruptive edits by an IP range since your version [1]. They have removed sources and added an unnecessary section 'Family'. There had been some maintenance work in between as well as a few new entries added, I wasn't sure of doing a full revert to your version. Please do the needful if possible. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:26, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The editor is topic-banned and can’t edit India-related articles. See the above threads. GrabUp - Talk 14:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

August 2024

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Ismail Haniyeh. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Also read MOS:TERRORIST on why this term is contentious and why Wikipedia avoids it. If you continue flouting Wikipedia rules in contentious topic areas, as you did with this edit, you might find your account increasingly restricted. — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ChatGPT

Hey there. Just wondering if you used AI / ChatGPT to make this post in Village Pump Proposals? –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:53, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Indian fundraiser appeal & court contempt notice

ping@Jimbo wales. I am wondering if you are aware of the current situation of contempt notice issued by the Indian court over non-compliance. You might want to see this and this diffs.

ping@Newslinger you are on a dossier. Have a look. BlackOrchidd (talk) 05:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish I believe this would be a violation of WP:TBAN in WP:ARBIPA, along with the post on Vanamonde's tp — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 08:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@scott Jimbo wales looks like the wikipedia India fundraiser flopped :D BlackOrchidd (talk) 13:59, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish Look like TBAN will not be adhered to — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 14:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating your topic ban, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating your topic ban while blocked for violating your topic ban, you have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Thats obvious BlackOrchidd (talk) 04:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]