User talk:MorpheusZ

June 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to List of massacres in India has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: List of massacres in India was changed by MorpheusZ (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.87105 on 2017-06-13T17:24:34+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 17:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Violence related to cow protection in India

Please read WP:EW and WP:VANDAL. Do not accuse people of vandalism until you know what it is, and do not blanket revert edits that have support on the talk page without first discussing the issue there. Vanamonde (talk) 12:04, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Vanamonde You are Vandalising "Sourced" content which is already there for many years. Please read WP:EW and WP:VANDAL you are Vandalising & Deleting Source content. MorpheusZ (talk) 12:07, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The content has not been there for many years. It is quite recent. There is also a big difference between content removal and vandalism, which you do not appear to understand, so please read that link. It is also not enough for content to be sourced for it to be in an article. It's also important to note that Sarah Welch, who wrote a lot of that material, supports the trimming I was engaged in. You have still not raised any issues on the talk page of the article, which is rather disruptive. Please do so now. Vanamonde (talk) 12:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Vanamonde Please see history. you are Vandalising "Sourced" Content without any reason. Many Users objected to you including Sarah Welch. i have been watching you. You are doing it deliberately and deleting whole Background section without any reason. MorpheusZ (talk) 12:15, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA 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.

June 2017

Your recent editing history at Violence related to cow protection in India 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. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:14, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vanamonde93 has been trimming the background sections, as required, which has the support of all the involved editors. If you have objections to the content he has deleted, please discuss them on the talk page. Repeated reinstatements without explanation or discussion will get you blocked. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:16, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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:MorpheusZ reported by User:Kautilya3 (Result: ). Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 13:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]