User talk:Shyamrocky

Shyamrocky, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Shyamrocky! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Vijay (actor), without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Thomas.W ^talk 16:08, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Thalaivaa, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Thalaivaa was changed by Shyamrocky (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.926817 on 2014-10-29T17:47:55+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 17:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Vijay (actor). Final warning for both edits on Vijay (actor), adding unsourced fancruft and peacockery, and edits on Thalaivaa, removing properly sourced content as well as adding unsourced fancruft and peacockery there too. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a fanblog! Thomas.W ^talk 18:29, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Vijay (actor). 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 be blocked from editing. 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. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for Repeated addition of unreferenced data. 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 20:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Vijay (actor). DMacks (talk) 04:32, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Vijay (actor) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:42, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond

Are you reading these messages and warnings at all? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:45, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. DMacks (talk) 04:51, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]