User talk:Sugandha chabra88

October 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Talk:Rohtak. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. 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. Sitush (talk) 10:22, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Rohtak, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Please could you also be aware that we should not use "camel case", which is where the first letter of words are capitalised Unnecessarily Like This. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters) for guidance regarding appropriate capitalisation. Thanks. Sitush (talk) 13:20, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Rohtak. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Sitush (talk) 09:57, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rohtak. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sitush (talk) 07:00, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HI, you keep insisting on adding poorly phrased, unsourced content to the Rohtak article, not to mention continued use Of Camel Case In The Prose. Since you have shown no inclination to respond in a collegiate manner to previous notices etc, I've issued the above "edit warring" notice. There are some tips in it, and also some links to further information. I suggest that you read them and thereafter act upon them. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 07:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]