User talk:Priyanka Sahi

Welcome!

Hello, Priyanka Sahi, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking

if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! – XLinkBot (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content
Miscellaneous
User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

August 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Haidakhan Babaji has been reverted.
Your edit here to Haidakhan Babaji was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiNYs099U5w) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Bentogoa. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Haidakhan Babaji, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Bentogoa (talk) 15:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Haidakhan Babaji. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Bentogoa (talk) 15:10, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Haidakhan Babaji, you may be blocked from editing. Bentogoa (talk) 15:27, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Haidakhan Babaji.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Haidakhan Babaji was changed by Priyanka Sahi (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.853937 on 2016-08-14T15:31:24+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability

The sources you are providing are OR , and do not meet RS. Bentogoa (talk) 17:10, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the link provided and stop spamming the same message on my talk page again and again Bentogoa (talk) 17:12, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistent disruptive editing. 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 to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:28, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Priyanka Sahi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #16335 was submitted on Aug 15, 2016 03:42:51. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 03:42, 15 August 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).

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

Request reason:

I have followed the Guidelines of Editing by Providing Citing sources and references after the warnings issued of vandalism, but just when i was finished with final editing of the DEATH section and sending thanking message to bentagao. I was blocked and my edits were reverted to Original. I request to pls unblock and have me post my Edits back as per your Rules and Guidelines. My Edits remained there for the last 10 hours but only when i was sending a thanking message i was BLOCKED! Rules are well understood already Priyanka Sahi (talk) 03:46, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were warned numerous times to stop posting original research and you persisted. If you do not understand our WP:NOR policy, than WP:CIR would apply. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:10, 15 August 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

After the Warnings i was able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented. that is why my edits remained for more 10 hours but just when i was adding a picture update i was blocked, i have complied with WP:CIR policy and will stick to it, Allow me to make the Final Edit as per the Rules and guidelines followed Priyanka Sahi (talk) 04:16, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is simply not true. For example, your most recent edit prior to being blocked is this, which failed to include a citation at all. If, once your block expires, you continue with these sorts of edits, I fear your next block will be indefinite instead of for only 48 hours. Yamla (talk) 12:49, 15 August 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Yamla, I think there is fault in your system and it is you guys who are faltering, i have cited the sources even on the page of bentagoa, i have included the quotes from the books in which mentioned the name of the culprits, i have included the link of the documentary in which included is testimonies from police, media and journalist, if you are unable to see it - how does that makes me faulter? you have to be indepth in your research, i fight for truth alone, i can wait for block to be lifted but my last edit with all the sources of the 3 books along with page number and quotes i mentioned remained on the page for 10 hours, when i tried to include picture, you guys blocked me from vandalism, i think you guys have taken this religious fight too seriously- i am a Journalist a Media Person who has plenty of Evidences and Proofs gathered from Court and Testimonies of witnesses which is in the documentary and mentioned in the Books.. I do not see any reason for you to block me from publishing truth - If i do not then somebody else will - Haidakhan Baba did not die of Heartattack- you guys blocked me before i could take the screenshot - or else i would have presented you the Citation with the book links and the quote... I will paste the Same information along with the sources after the block is Lifted, I will be happy to share the entire edit with you so you guys can go ahead and approve or add on your own.. thanks you Priyanka Sahi (talk) 13:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you want to "fight for truth" then go do it elsewhere, because Wikipedia is not the place for it. To prevent further wasted time, I have revoked your ability to edit this page. If you wish to make a further request, please see WP:UTRS - but be warned that that will not be successful if you cannot show you understand what reliable sources are. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:23, 15 August 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.

Indefinite block

Your pledge to continue the same behavior after your block expires is a good reason to extend your block to indefinite. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:25, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Priyanka Sahi, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Bentogoa (talk) 07:07, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]