User talk:Mugunthsboa

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like it here and stick around. If you like, you can leave a note at Wikipedia:New user log to introduce yourself.

Before you start doing a lot of editing, you might want to take the Tutorial. It gives lots of basic information to help you to get oriented on Wikipedia.

You can sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (" ~~~~ ") for your username and a timestamp. If you have any other questions about the project, then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Help desk. Alternately, you may choose to send a message to my talk page.

Happy editing! Yuser31415 ^{reply!|contribs} 04:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:359012203 a596426389 o.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:359012203 a596426389 o.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 11:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

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. Please do not indulge in personal attacks [1] [2] — DaxServer (t · m · c) 12:42, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Chennai International Airport, 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.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Chennai International Airport, you may be blocked from editing. Random Haste (talk) 13:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Chennai International Airport. Random Haste (talk) 13:36, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Random Haste (talk) 13:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute over Chennai International Airport

The source you are attaching after US-Bangla and Jazeera doesn't prove that the flights will continue after 27 March 2022. Random Haste (talk) 14:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can go visit their booking page for your own satisfaction Mugunthsboa (talk) 14:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Booking engines are not reliable. Random Haste (talk) 14:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

oh so can you please, go to all your arguments citing booking engines as the reason of having/not having a city in the list?

Please donot engage in an edit war. Booking engines are the ultimate point of consumption of this information and are essentially a medium of communication by the airline who owns and operates a route after getting directorate approvals. Infact they are the closest source to the truth. Kindly dont bias this article to dominate your philosophy over a broader utilitarian consensus. Mugunthsboa (talk) 14:35, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Booking engines are not reliable sources. There is no way to prove if the flight is scheduled on a regular basis or temporary based on booking engines. There is also no way you can actually correctly site a booking engine for a specific sector.

Coming to your comment:

You can go visit their booking page for your own satisfaction.

Please read WP:BURDEN. It is the sole responsibility of the editor changing content to prove it, not for someone else to go and verify it. — LeoFrank ^Talk 16:57, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Do not add or change content, as you did at Chennai International Airport, without citing a reliable source. So stop giving theories and review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Random Haste (talk) 14:06, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stop lecturing and bullying a whole bunch of people while contradicting every bit of it in your action Mugunthsboa (talk) 20:13, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. Booking engines are not reliable as per wikipedia. If not all additions can be cited, those are better not added. Such data is considered as WP:VANDALISM. If you still continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Chennai International Airport, you may be blocked from editing. Random Haste (talk) 13:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1.cite a policy where non cited cities in airport destinations specifically are required to be removed

2.Applying your own policies, why have you retained cities in BLR destination without citation?

3.Go take a look at cities added at all airport destinations section.

4.Cite a policy where wikipedia says booking engine sources are invalid for the purpose of destinations section in an airport article

I have been noticing your edit war behaviour quite consistently. It only points to some vested interest. STOP VANDALISM Mugunthsboa (talk) 13:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. — LeoFrank ^Talk 14:18, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1.cite a policy where non cited cities in airport destinations specifically are required to be removed

2.Applying your own policies, why have you retained cities in BLR destination without citation?

3.Go take a look at cities added at all airport destinations section.

4.Cite a policy where wikipedia says booking engine sources are invalid for the purpose of destinations section in an airport article

I have seen many of your edits and respect your contribution. But today you have violated your own statement by undoing my changes and not discussing them in the article talk page prior. If you acknowledge your lack of interest in discussing it here and reaching a consensus (thereby preventing edit wars) we can reach out the DRN == Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion ==

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

26th June 2022 Mugunth Mugunthsboa (talk) 16:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC) Mugunthsboa (talk) 16:46, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mugunthsboa. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

Another user using wikipedia for first time in my vicinity doesnt mean I am using an alternative account. I am reverting things I disagree in my own account and dont have to use a sock puppet. Besides if I were sock puppeting i would reverted all the edits. why just one??? Mugunthsboa (talk) 03:25, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's difficult to accept this as a coincidence, but even if it was, it would be meat puppetry. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 30 June 2022 (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.

November 2023

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Kempegowda International Airport, 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. — LeoFrank ^Talk 15:13, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]