User talk:Ravindra kumar Arkavanshi

Recent edit to Arakh

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Arakh, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 10:10, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, can you also please take a read of WP:SOCK. I am slightly concerned that you might inadvertently have broken our policy regarding use of multiple accounts, given the recent contributions of AuthorRk (talk · contribs). No worries if you haven't, obviously. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 10:12, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Sanctions

The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or a topic ban. The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here. Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:General sanctions/South Asian social groups.

Please, please take a read of our policy regarding verifiability and consider opening a discussion at Talk:Arakh if you think that the material you keep reinstating is valid per that policy. You cannot keep battling away on this issue: the situation arises so often in relation to caste articles that the Wikipedia community long ago agreed that special measures were needed to deal with the disruption that results, hence the notice above. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 11:00, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Ravindra kumar Arkavanshi, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Ravindra kumar Arkavanshi! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! 78.26 (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:25, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Arakh 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: Arakh was changed by Ravindra kumar Arkavanshi (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.884025 on 2015-12-05T07:20:34+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 07:20, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Please don't edit war

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors. 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 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 editing privileges. 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 lead to a loss of editing privileges.

You are edit warring with several users and even with the anti-vandalism bot (ClueBot) to insert unsourced material in the article. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Bishonen | talk 11:05, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Arakh. Sitush (talk) 15:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Heads up चेतावनी

Ravindra Kumar - you will be blocked from editing if you don't follwo rules. रविन्द्र कुमार जी आप अगर नियमोंका पालन नहीं करेंगे तो आप के संपादन करने के अधिकार खंडित किये जाएंगे| Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hrs for edit warring, as you did at Arakh. 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 ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  regentspark (comment) 15:51, 6 December 2015 (UTC)