User talk:Science nerd11112007

Edit

You edit the Australian Open Men's Singles quarterfinals score , but it's not the full score. Please don't edit wrong. খাঁটি বাঙালি (talk) 13:33, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but I gave asterisk to indicate that it's going on still Science nerd11112007 (talk) 15:24, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Hello, I'm DaxServer. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Asaduddin Owaisi, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! — DaxServer (t · m · c) 10:16, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Science nerd11112007, 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 recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always 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.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Introduction to referencing
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 23:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to India: The Modi Question, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Black Kite (talk) 13:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:21, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

Avoid making personal attacks (WP:NPA) like you did here. Capitals00 (talk) 09:13, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New message from 331dot

Hello, Science nerd11112007. You have new messages at Slatersteven's talk page.
Message added 07:48, 30 April 2023 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

331dot (talk) 07:48, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dhruv Rathee. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Ajeeb Prani (talk) 03:22, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:03, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Science nerd11112007,

At Wikipedia, we have editors of all nationalities, religions, ethnicities, genders and you can't state your hatred for some of them or for article subjects that are covered on this project. We have to maintain a neutral point-of-view on the project and plus, Wikipedia believes in inclusitivity. If you think these pillars of belief are "liberal propaganda", then this is not the right place for you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:53, 26 June 2023 (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).

Science nerd11112007 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have reviewed your decision to block me. I apologize for making edits to "Dhruv Rathee" page on Wikipedia and will refrain from making uncited edits. However, please note that removing my user page under the pretext of 'rm hatred' by user Dax server will serve no purpose in me not claiming my beliefs. I will surely be more ethical and respectful, but in no way is being conservative a reason for being banned. Sincerely, therefore I request you to unblock me. Science nerd11112007 (talk) 09:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am not comfortable unblocking an editor who says they hate all Muslims. PhilKnight (talk) 16:42, 27 June 2023 (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.

Comment by blocking admin - You were not blocked for "beling conservative". You were blocked for this edit stating your hatred for all Muslims which you followed with this BLP-violating edit. You also stated that you "just go about removing liberal propaganda", which is counter to the mission of building an encyclopedia (see WP:NPOV and WP:NOTHERE). EvergreenFir (talk) 14:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Calling bullshit. You are not blocked for being conservative. There are conservatives and users from all across the political spectrum on Wikipedia. They edit constructively.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #75378

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]