User talk:Ravi mavi

November 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Bappa Rawal. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 20:25, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should look at you first giving more preference to anonymous person. Clan of Bappa rawal is disputed. He could be jat/gurjar/Rajput.but you arbitrarily trying to prove Rajput to everybody without any knowledge of Indian history. If you have any govt. Proof to prove that Bappa Rawal was a king of Rajput clan then, why don't you link up the attachment 🙄. I requested you don't vandalise Chaulukya dynasty even though I have attached govt. Record and historian study both but you didn't respond and continue to revert the change. I don't know about your country but In India nobody is above the law or the govt. and our agreed on it that's why they updated the site and clearly mentioned that Rajputs of solanki, pratihar, and paramaras dynasty were gurjars. Still more study is going on paramaras dynasty thus, disputed. But I don't know why are you updating bogus info on Indian history without knowing a bit and trying to prove everybody as Rajput king. just go and learn about the meaning of Rajput, you will clearly found that it means a son of a king but a few adopted Rajput as a clan after the invasion of mughals and Britishers in our country. Just go and do a little study about gurjars, Rajput etc and then, give advice to anybody. Thank you Ravi mavi (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Wikipedia. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Heba Aisha (talk) 04:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I'm very new to the Wikipedia only after Knowing the fact that a few anonymous has completely removed the gurjars and their history from the Wikipedia and put up Rajput words at the place of it over the 2-3 years. But earlier it was not the case when I was in college till 2014-15 and used to read about it. Anyways amazed and feel secure when I found an Indian who could be better known about the Indian history. Thanks for being there !!

Mam, Pls tell me as govt. site already mentioned that :- (It is believed that the Gujjars belonged to this Solanki Dynasty because Pratiharas, the Paramaras and the Solankis were imperial Gujjars. Ancient Gujarat’s last Hindu rulers were the Solanki clan of Rajputs from 960 AD to 1243 AD). Is this not worked for authencity ?? Ravi mavi (talk) 04:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert: India

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Mz7 (talk) 04:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I'm very new to the Wikipedia not much aware about the various rules and policies but trying to learn. Thank you sir for this warning but Did I done any mistake.😧 Ravi mavi (talk) 04:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ravi...welcome to wiki. Before making changes on controversial things, consider discussing with fellow editors on talk page of article. If you consistently revert others edits..admins may think that u are edit warring. Heba Aisha (talk) 03:37, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heba Aisha okay mam, thank you ! Ravi mavi (talk) 04:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Origin of the Gurjara-Pratiharas, 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. - Arjayay (talk) 14:36, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay sir, done 👍 sources are added, If you have any objection with my contents anywhere on Wikipedia then, please feel free to discuss here before doing reverting. and sir, As I thought It is well known to all generally that at the time of Gupta Empire, that particular place was known as Saurashtra. So, I didn't feel mandatory to add any references with it. Anyways it was my mistake. Thank you Ravi mavi (talk) 16:25, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When you construct fake warning messages like this with Wikipedia logos to make them look official, you are not going to get any sympathies from any one. You have already received a discretionary sanctions alert. So, please follow the rules and ask some one if you don't know how something should be done. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:08, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kautilya3 bro why are you considering me wrong. I really didn't have any intention to hurt anyone just read my all msg. Sorry, I have a little aggressive nature but doesn't means to hurt anyone of you. when you removed the whole article even after providing three references. Then, it hurted me because if you had any portion or reference then, you should do change with that only and I don't know the much understanding of giving warning or anything as you could also observed that I still don't know how to out this icon in small and I was just trying to learn to put up the message by observing the others only. I really don't know this is warning or any thing. Pls sorry, if you get hurted.🙏and I respect all irrespective of caste, religion, race, gender etc. Thank you 🙏 Ravi mavi (talk) 07:37, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I joined this 24 days ago and don't know much about. I only try to put up the message by observing others. If you think my polite nature is for sympathy then, pls read my all others message and also if possible my hindi wikipedia too and then, only you will understand me. Ravi mavi (talk) 07:43, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Origin of the Gurjara-Pratiharas. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. 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. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 08:07, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He has done it 3 times now ban him @kautilya3 Sungpeshwe9 (talk) 08:15, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

What was that about your "polite nature" above? Don't speak to people like you did here or here. You have been blocked for 48 hours for persistent personal attacks and assumptions of bad faith. Please take the time to read WP:NPA and WP:AGF, and speak civilly to others when you return from the block. Being new is a good reason to listen to advice from more experienced editors when it comes to sources in this contested and difficult area. Don't edit war with them, and, for instance, do not use self-published sources such as Wordpress. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | tålk 09:42, 4 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]

And I just noticed this rude reply. You really need to stop talking down to experienced editors and start listening to them instead, or your Wikipedia career will be very short. Bishonen | tålk 09:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]

What only for 24 hours 🙄 Are you kidding me ryt?🤨blocked me permanently man. If possible 👍 Now, I understand why this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-eAI3B2LB8 type of videos are available on YouTube just to help the people to understand the matter of concern. Although, Earlier I was not agree with it and people who were saying that Wikipedia is completely become unreliable now because of many your kind of people have come up here. but Wikipedia helped me a lots during my college days just 4-5 years agp but now, I completely agreed with them. That you people have destroyed and damaged the credibility and authencity of Wikipedia over the years. Okay,Do vandalism as possible as you can. If possible then, check my editing on Origin of the Gurjara-Pratiharas and then, give explaination what was wrong I have written in it. But Anyways thanking you for showing your arbitration and your powers on new editors 👍 I'm leaving now, take care bye !! Ravi mavi (talk) 10:13, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to know first how it was started then, accused to anybody. I was not rude earlier. Even though I said sorry to him and talked in a very polite manner but he started taking it just because I dropped a message for him on reverting my article which I wrote after doing a lots of study on it and even after giving various reliable sources. but he took up this in a wrong way and started to take the revenge by giving many warnings and reverting my content. Without any proper explainations and showed his power as he is a boss and privilege person on Wikipedia and new comers are nothing in front of him. Oh man people could be experienced on it but doesn't mean new comers are stupid or knowledge less person. I already told him that I don't have any intention to hurt him and also don't know Is it warning or what just did copy paste of one as others were doing the same on reverting. So, I did. But you people should understand that although new comers are not much aware about the policies etc but they could be more knowledgeable than you also. So, you need to treat them in a behave manner rather than like a cruel king. Thank you 👍 Ravi mavi (talk) 10:29, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bye bye. You have been blocked indefinitely for doubling down on the insults, and your access to editing this page has also been revoked. See the template below for how to request unblock now. Bishonen | tålk 11:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]

December 2020

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Bishonen | tålk 11:55, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS 38296 declined

UTRS appeal #38296 has been declined.

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. You have not addressed what you will do in the future and you come across as blaming others. If you do not understand how inappropriate your "warning" was, then you are likely to go on being rude. You also appear to have a poor grasp of reliable sources. And that brings us to the removal of the poorly sourced content you added. Unsourced and poorly sourced content should be removed. Please do read the feedback offered on your talk page. It seems evident that you have not taken that feedback in. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:50, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]