User talk:Chhotisaloni

November 2016

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Chhota Bheem, 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. Marianna251TALK 19:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other contributors, as you did with this edit to Chhota Bheem. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Marianna251TALK 19:40, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Please note that it is your responsibility to provide reliable sources for edits that you want to make. It doesn't matter how certain you are that your edits are accurate and necessary; you must provide sources for them or they do not belong on Wikipedia. Please also refrain from attacking other editors. Marianna251TALK 19:42, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Chhota Bheem. Marianna251TALK 19:42, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Chhota Bheem shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. Marianna251TALK 19:46, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Widr (talk) 20:26, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:49, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]