User talk:Helpinghand2013

Why you removed mine edit as i have updated it with Government of India legal notification link instead of Times of India news article and yahoo graph line?

July 2014

Please stop making test edits to Roswell UFO incident, if you wish to experiment use the Sandbox instead. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 08:26, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Your recent editing history at Tanu Weds Manu Returns 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. Krimuk|90 (talk) 11:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Other user is deliberately removing Authentic information from the page. I have already initiated talk but he is not replaying.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Helpinghand2013 reported by User:Krimuk90 (Result: ). Thank you. Krimuk|90 (talk) 11:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage editors. Please read Wikipedia:NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. TL22 (talk) 16:19, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So Wikipedia encourage bullying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helpinghand2013 (talk • contribs)

No, but that doesn't mean you must call every edit "vandalism". --TL22 (talk) 16:46, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Tanu Weds Manu Returns. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 15:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 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. 5 albert square (talk) 18:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]