User talk:Shashank5988

Stop reverting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.21.67.120 (talk) 18:25, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to India. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 19:23, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Sweden, you may be blocked from editing. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 13:43, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at 2016 Indian banknote demonetisation. bonadea contributions talk 16:47, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

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 recently shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. 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 any 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.

Icewhiz (talk) 12:28, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Persecution of Hindus. 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 the sandbox. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:56, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should better familiarize yourself with WP:WTRMT given the template addition was disruptive. Also check the removal of 8,500 bytes of pointy removal.[1] I haven't discovered any "OR" or "NPOV" dispute at all with the longstanding version, but user's own misunderstanding of the definition and policies. Also, why you restored a "citation needed" tag on the lead which itself violates WP:CITELEAD? How can we trust over such misleading tagging when the person who is tagging at first place is himself not aware of the policies? Shashank5988 (talk) 11:12, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DS-alert

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 recently 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 any 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.

Anand Teltumbde

Dear Shashank,

I take a neutral view of Anand Teltumbde. Regarding his possible association with Maoists, I will let the courts judge that based on the evidence. However there is no doubt that he is a very well known scholar, nationally and internationally, with numerous publications and citations. If you will remove well known information about him, others will be compelled to document his credentials extensively. I suggest you refrain from frivolous editing.Malaiya (talk)

Why you are not using article's talk page? If you are going to keep adding unsourced and undue stuff then don't find it shocking that someone has reverted you. This has been a pattern of your editing as noted by others on your talk page. Shashank5988 (talk) 06:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Abhinandan Varthaman

 Thank you for the mentioning policy for the single event News related person. I won't revert it again.  MrZINE 16:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected misuse of editing privileges

In response to your comment here, the edits raised by the other user are decent enough evidence to at least raise a concern that you may abusing editing privileges by editing both from this account and also using an IP address for editing (e.g. by logging out of your account or using another device, etc), contrary to policy. I would be careful to avoid doing this as you may be blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. Also be advised an investigation may be carried out per WP:SOCK. NJA (t/c) 15:03, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NJA: I have already commented there as the accusation is entirely baseless. I am welcome any investigation and you may want to read WP:ASPERSIONS, the accusations of socking must be made only on WP:SPI. Shashank5988 (talk) 15:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing further to add. As such and to summarize what I’ve said already: the edits provided by the other use offered enough to raise at least a suspicion of abuse. I’d argue there was a basis for the concern being raised due to disputed edits on the article Giriraj Singh. Nonetheless I do not plan to take further at this time. Finally, and unless you are actively monitoring the other users’ talk page, it is interesting that you knew about the post providing two edits as evidence of potential sock puppetry as no one had yet pinged you seeking comment. NJA (t/c) 16:07, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I only see that everyone is supposed to warn that editor on their talk page who is edit warring and throwing baseless accusations on article's talk page only for justifying own disruption. I was not doing anything different than that, or I was? Shashank5988 (talk) 18:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please be very careful, do not issue false threats, be civil

Shashank. Be careful issuing false threats to extended users. I'll highlight your behaviour to a relevant admin, but you just be welk aware the kind of behaviour your aengahing leaves a sorry user. Would you explain why you have included a DS template, or will I be including this in the Kjnd of false and abusive edit you are undertaking? rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 19:15, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. qedk (t 桜 c) 20:39, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ignorance

Please may I draw your attention to the unanswered (for more than 12 days now) that I posed to you at 07:02, 13 May 2019 (UTC) on my User Talk page after you templated me?

This that unanswered question:

"Unfortunately you have not modified the template notice you used above to include the diff that would pinpoint my alleged crime.

Please assist by providing a clear indication of what exactly you are on about! "

--BushelCandle (talk) 02:21, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at K. B. Hedgewar, you may be blocked from editing. I also note that you know about edit summaries but didn't use one here. Doug Weller talk 11:58, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Saṃyutta Nikāya, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Please don't remove external links that are non-commercial and educative or scholarly in nature. Usually such websites do not come under the category WP:SPAM. Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 19:19, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

B. R. Ambedkar

I note you have yet again reverted to an error-ridden version version of the article. Are you going to fix them or shall I revert to an error free version? As previously discussed on my talk page, feel free to remove content you think is inappropriate, but do it in a responsible manner so you do not reintroduce the myriad of errors on the page. --John B123 (talk) 21:23, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalization and aggressive Reverts

Hello Shashank5988,

Like you did last year, you have yet again reverted many edits on the Pashtuns page. Even admins as Dough Weller have accepted that the Sheen khalai source dispute is solved as you can see in the edit history.

Shilpi Batra the lady in the article itself has confirmed it that they were Punjabi's per ancestry so why are you not dropping the stick. Please stop the reverts and threats. Thank you

Here is the source where they say it themselves. https://www.thebetterindia.com/155394/hindu-pashtun-shilpi-batra-sheenkhalai-afghanistan/

read it for Wikipedia's sake WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Except for the source in the religion section. they can stay though. Casperti (talk) 22:28, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

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.

— Newslinger talk 20:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

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 (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. 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.

Doug Weller talk 09:13, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Hi, Apologies for the reverts today - At the time of reverting you I didn't spot Arsi786's name nor did the find option find Arsi786's name so I don't know what went wrong but anywho I've self reverted both at the archive and the Request for closure page, Again my apologies for reverting you today,
Happy editing, Thanks, Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:50, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA closed

I have closed the AE appeal at ARCA to which you were listed as a party. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 23:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(My apologies, the correct link is Special:Permalink/967383051#Amendment_request:_India-Pakistan.) Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 17:59, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:35, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

— DaxServer (t · m · c) 10:22, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]