User talk:Fapple

September 2016

Hello, I'm JJMC89. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 20:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at 2016 Uri attack. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 20:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Fapple

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as User:Fapple, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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. -- Gestrid (talk) 22:45, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

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 that 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.

Please note also the restrictions at Talk:Indo-Pakistani relations#Editing restrictions. Kautilya3 (talk) 23:27, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-Pak conflict in Kashmir restrictions

Re your edits to 2016 Uri attack. Please read and make yourself aware of the restrictions that apply to any articles relating to the Kashmir conflict between India and Pakistan. --regentspark (comment) 23:43, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for harassing other users. 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 to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hello there. I'm sorry to have to disagree with any administrative decision but I firmly believe that I do not deserve what I have come to understand as an "infinite" ban. I think it is completely outrageous that I receive an INFINITE ban for the following circumstances: First, I change the wording of the 2016 Uri Attack that describes the perpetrators as "terrorists" to "insurgents" (which better reflects what they are). Next, some racist Indian comes and changes my wording to derogatory and vulgar language targeted towards Pakistanis. Naturally, wanting to silence this troll, I do the mature thing and INITIALLY instead of replying, I simply revert this infantile edit.; however, he reverts the page back to the racist remarks and insults Pakistanis further. I then REGRETTABLY lose my cool SLIGHTLY and tell him to either act mature or stop editing (any insane personal attacks here?). Apparently because I reverted racism too many times, I'm blocked for a while. Then, out of no where like Randy Orton (only even more crazily), I am banned for an "INFINITE" period of time for Cross Wiki Vandalism block (ID #272776). Again, this was over REVERTING racism more than 3 times which unfortunately I didn't know at the time. Besides, after I DID revert 3 times I was warned to not do so, and I didn't do any more after that. I distinctly get the impression that the admin "INeverCry" is what you call "butthurt" (no intention of being rude here) which sadly contradicts the beautiful meaning of his name. I therefore ask you to please unblock me as I only see one mistake in my actions: Getting a bit angry towards a blatant troll and racist.

Decline reason:

You were blocked for personal attacks such as, "I knew the butthurt indians would crawl out of their caves tonight and expose the lies their media tells them." Unfortunately, your personal attacks have continued in this very unblock request. As such, that's as far as my block review goes. You are welcome to request another unblock, but, and I want to be very, very clear here, you need to convince us that you understand personal attacks have no place here and you won't make any more. Yamla (talk) 17:40, 21 September 2016 (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.

Infinite vs indefinite

Note also that your block is indefinite in duration, not necessarily infinite. That is, it can be lifted once we are sure you'll never engage in personal attacks or harassment again, but the block won't just expire. You have to convince us to lift it. --Yamla (talk) 17:41, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]