User talk:Pilot2020mi

Welcome!

Hello, Pilot2020mi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Varna (Hinduism) have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, 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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Sitush (talk) 14:22, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Plagiarism

Your edits to Women in Hinduism have been reverted as most of it was found to copy-paste from various websites. Please use your own language to present facts in the reference and credit it as a source. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop restoring your edits; come discuss at Talk:Varna (Hinduism)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Varna (Hinduism). Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. 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. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:26, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, your contribution was not acceptable anyway because it was an assembly of copy/pastes from websites such as this. You have already received a warning for this type of behaviour. Please heed it. - Sitush (talk) 20:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You continue to make edits which you've been told are not suitable, you refuse to explain your edits, and you don't communicate with other editors. Please pause, and come talk to fellow editors on the article's Talk page or on this one, or you will be blocked for disruptive editing. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reported for inappropriate editing

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Thank you.. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Women in Hinduism , Criticism of Hinduism, and Varna (Hinduism). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sitush (talk) 05:39, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have already breached our three revert rule at Varna (Hinduism). Please can you start discussing the issues that you raise on the various articles talk pages. Failure to do so is going to lead to you being blocked from contributing. I would suggest that you familiarise yourself with our policies regarding fringe theories, copyright violations, plagiarism and reliable sources before doing so: the content that you are adding consists mostly of hacked-together copies from various websites and in particular from forums on those sites. What we need is content written in your own words and supported by sources that have some credibility, eg: books published by academic presses that have been peer-reviewed and written by people of some standing. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 05:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yes

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.

$Salvio$ ^{Let's talk about it!} 10:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Islam in India, you may be blocked from editing. Transcendence (talk) 19:05, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of a week. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block.

Salvio

^{Let's talk about it!} 19:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

Furthermore, considering you have consistently edited in a disruptive fashion, I am also imposing a topic ban. For the next six months, you are prohibited from making any edits across all namespaces (i.e. everywhere on Wikipedia) regarding any religion in India.

Salvio

^{Let's talk about it!} 19:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]