User talk:Chotaripple

Welcome!

Hello, Chotaripple, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Battle of Sialkot (1763), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

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 Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, 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! — Masum Ibn Musa ^Conversation 14:53, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at History. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Saddhiyama (talk) 17:54, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Editing templates

Please take great care when editing templates and do not touch code which you do not 100% understand. You changed the < and > in this edit, and damaged the template. I've mended it now. PamD 09:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit warring on Battle of Chamkaur

In response to your ridiculous accusation of me edit warring. I will highlight a few points:
1. Your edits are similar to a blocked user/sockpuppets edits.
2. You like to edit war while logged out.
3. You have been reverted by Xtremedood, DMacks, Plastikspork and myself.
4. Despite your edit(s) being reverted by 4 different editors, not once have you taken your "concerns" to the talk page. Why is that?
This clearly illustrates the situation at the Battle of Chamkaur article. If you wish to continue the facade that "other editors are edit warring", I would be more than happy to alert an Admin to your situation. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kansas Bear (talk) sir but u should write the content which is accurate . First u asked me to bring a published source now I brought the source and u r now betraying me . Waah what. Wikipedia policy to deal with the users Chotaripple (talk) 08:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reported for Edit warring

See here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Battle of Chamkaur

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 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 appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{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.

The full report is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Chotaripple reported by User:Kansas Bear (Result: Blocked), Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Complaint about your edits on my talk page

Hello Chotaripple. Please see User talk:EdJohnston#User:Chotaripple. You may respond there if you wish. If you continue to engage in nationalist warring and poor use of references you may be indefinitely blocked. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:21, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chotaripple, your recent statement on your talk page is quite hard to understand: "sir but u should write the content which is accurate . First u asked me to bring a published source now I brought the source and u r now betraying me . Waah what. Wikipedia policy to deal with the users Chotaripple (talk) 08:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)". This raises the question, whether you have good enough knowledge of English to be able to participate on the English Wikipedia. At the Battle of Chamkaur you added "Mughals failed to capture him despite in large numbers", which is grammatically wrong. For the number of soldiers you wrote "10,00000" which is meaningless. Unless you promise to wait for consensus before making changes on these articles, you may be blocked for disruption. EdJohnston (talk) 12:18, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Chamkaur is covered by discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBIPA

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

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.

EdJohnston (talk) 12:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]