User talk:Sureshpandey

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

Dear Admin, We have corrected the information about Mr KC Pant since we are related to him. If you want to remove bold and underline, it's ok with us but kindly do not change the content bcoz all the information is given by us is authentic.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Kautilya3 (talk) 14:14, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Kautilya3 (talk) 14:15, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IMPORTANT

Hi. I notice that you've uploaded multiple photographs of Govind Pant. You've labeled these photos as "own work", and you've dated them to 2015. Similarly, you've uploaded photos of his son KC Pant, and you've dated them to 2014.

Govind Pant died in 1961, and KC Pant died in 2012. Therefore, those photos clearly are not from 2015 and 2014. If the photos have false dates on them, how can we believe the statement that you are the photographer (which is what "own work" means)?

Right now, it is February 11. I will give you until February 14 to correct that data (also, if you were not the photographer, you must say where the photograph came from!); otherwise, the photos will have to be deleted. DS (talk) 15:52, 11 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Hi I have albums of these photographs in hard copy I just scanned those photos from these albums in year 2015.

Okay. This is very important: scanning in the photographs DOES NOT MAKE YOU THE CREATOR. They are not your own work. And when the form asks for the date, you are supposed to give the date that the photograph was taken, not the date that you scanned it in. Also, we need to know, who were the photographers. How did you have these photographs in an album in the first place? DS (talk) 05:18, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry There are no Information about the Photographers and the date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.161.200.206 (talk) 06:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You say the photos were in an album. You also say that you represent the office of KC Pant? Were these personal photos or government photos? DS (talk) 17:31, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These photos are scaned from the personal copy's of Mr. K.c. pant Albums. We scaned thousands of albums. These are few of them. It may be possible that government have same album's. We are digitalising all information about him. You can check ila pant,s wiki there are some information about digitalization process. Kindly do not remove these photographs.

K. C. Pant

Hello there, if you could explain why you are removing my edits to K. C. Pant, it would be great. I am simply trying to fix the article to make it comply with Wikipedia's Manual of Style -- for example, bolding and underlining section headings is not necessary (see MOS:HEAD). Bolding of captions and all other text on the page is also unnecessary, see MOS:BOLD, where I quote from the guideline: "Avoid using boldface for emphasis in article text.", assuming that is what you are trying to do. Another point is to avoid "peacock" terms -- the usage of certain adjectives to make the article non-neutral. My edits are ensuring smooth navigation for readers through the page by ensuring that the article doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. Thanks, ^My^name ^isnot^dave (talk/contribs) 10:01, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: See how Indira Gandhi is formatted, for example. ^My^name ^isnot^dave (talk/contribs) 10:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

you are changing the format only (bold and underline) but also changing the content of the article which we are corrected. We are working in the office of this politician of India.

Hello Admin, We had corrected the information about Shri KC Pant since we are working in his office. We don't mind if you change the formatting i.e. bold underline but kindly do not change the information since it is authentic and true.

How can you be working in KC Pant's office when he died in 2012? DS (talk) 16:17, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hello admin, what type of question is this. We are working with his family.

Please read this guideline: WP:Conflict of interest. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sureshpandey reported by User:My name is not dave (Result: ). Thank you. ^My^name ^isnot^dave (talk/contribs) 10:29, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Govind Ballabh Pant. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 10:56, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Issuing level 1 warning about removing AfD template from articles before the discussion is complete. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Ila Pant. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:24, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is K.C. Pant and Sureshpandey. Thank you. ^My^name ^isnot^dave (talk/contribs) 13:06, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Suresh. I think there might be some misunderstandings. Generally, it's not considered appropriate to ask others not to edit a page (see WP:OWN). Pages are changed or kept based on WP:CONSENSUS. If there are disagreements between editors, it's best to discuss them on the article's talk page and try to reach an agreement. If you have any questions or if I can help feel free to contact me. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 15:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Timothyjosephwood thanks for your positive response, dear it's also not considered appropriate to change the whole article.Sureshpandey (talk) 16:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:BRD. It's good to make bold edits, but if other editors disagree, then it is acceptable for them to revert the edit, and the two should discuss on the article talk page. It looks like, of all your edits so far, none of them have been on article talk pages. This makes it seem to others that you are unwilling to seek consensus or community input for your proposed changes, and may make it more likely for people to revert your edits.

It also looks like 73% of your edits have included no edit summary. This should go in the box at the bottom of the pages which says "Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes.)". Leaving this blank may also make it more likely for others to see your edits as disruptive and revert them.

If an editor does not justify and refuses to discuss edits others take issue with, it is perfectly acceptable for the community to revert those edits, and seek sanctions against the user, up to and including administrator bans. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 16:44, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Govind_Ballabh_Pant

Your images are being reverted as there are too many of them, and it's making the page look cluttered. At least two users disagree with the photos you wish to add in. Please get consensus on the talk page before you revert again. This isn't us being bossy, it's WP:Consensus, this is how Wikipedia works. KoshVorlon 18:44, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Pokhran.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Pokhran.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

KC PANT

@Sureshpandey, burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material please read, WP:PROVEIT and add these pages as sources after the end of statements in the article itself.. and if you don't know how to cite news or provide sources, please read WP:VERIFY, Template:Cite news, WP:RELIABLE and WP:CITE too. Also, the more appropriate place to discuss these issues is the article's talk page itself, you are purposely ignoring the messages posted in the talk pages of KC and ILA pant.. thanks --Adamstraw99 (talk) 11:21, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on Ila pant

Your recent editing history at Ila Pant shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. 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. Adamstraw99 (talk) 09:19, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ Sureshpandey , do you understand English or i should write in Hindi or any other language?.. we have discussed it in detail in GB Pant talk page... now you are repeating yourself here.. you are violating several guidelines and you promised there that you wud abide by them.. I had explained you earlier that it does not matter whether your content is getting positive feedback or not... doesn't your mind get the simple and straight thing that you cannot claim ownership of any article on wikipedia and you will need to provide third party sources for all claims and statements in the article? didn't you read or understand this yet--> WP:OWN.. I Am really fed-up with you... like a mad i am wasting my time trying to make you comply with the numerous guideline i sent you to read in GB Talk page... but even after wasting so much time we are back to square one. I Am going to ignore any message from you on my talk page from now on... I have other things to do but i will respond if you raise any issue or address the issues listed in these articles talk page... thanks --Adamstraw99 (talk) 07:16, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sureshpandey reported by User:Adamstraw99. Thank you. --Adamstraw99 (talk) 08:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Names of family members in KC Pant

Mr. Pandey, it now looks like you did not even bother to read the Wikipedia guidelines which i sent you in GB Pant talk page..did you? Because WP:BLPNAME clearly stats --> " names of family members who are not also notable public figures must be removed from an article if they are not properly sourced." .... I can understand your plight that your bosses are paying you(and may be pressurising you ) for adding these contents but sadly, anything violating wikipedia policies will not stand here... thanks for understanding --Adamstraw99 (talk) 14:24, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Ila Pant. utcursch | talk 16:13, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:BURDEN and WP:BLP. If you add the same content to Ila Pant again without any citation, you will be blocked. utcursch | talk 16:13, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for contravening Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as you did at Ila Pant. 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 ~~~~}}. utcursch | talk 11:43, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please read and understand this again

Please read and understand this again once you are unblocked -->> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Financial_conflict_of_interest

thanks Adamstraw99 (talk) 14:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Kautilya3 (talk) 18:35, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To edit wiki pages

@Adamstraw99

It is not about a edit war its about not appreciating the labour of love.

I am afraid Your arrogance and intolerance is reflecting in your text.

You call yourself cultured and educated and this is how you write, my friend!!

The language and the tenor!! Lesser said the better.

I and my friends may not be as qualified or privileged as you but yes we understand research and historical research and in the normal course we get letters of appreciation from most readers as well as publishers of articles.

You may try and provoke us & be outright rude – we don’t want to get into a verbal blame game with you.

When we leave some question or comments on the talk section – please “read” the comments and “respond”- what you do is that you don’t read our responses or answer any question.

Its your way or highway !!

That’s not how it works my friend!! – don’t show your frustration and lake of culture on paper – if you write in the fashion that you have – it reflects as your upbringing .

Lastly if I/we understand English or if you should communicate with me /us in Hindi??- what arrogance my friend- you are some one we would all like to meet in person in order to get tutorials.

May I/we request you to be polite and decent in your comments in future .

We would be making some changes to the pages – our request is to come to the “talk page” before unilaterally making any changes to the Text or photographs .

thanks

Sureshpandey (talk) 05:48, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ Sureshpandey , my dear friend, you just keep on repeating yourself again and again and do not understand (or try to understand) the Wikipedia policies.. that's why i thought there must be some language barrier.. And you were blocked by an Admin and not me... for VIOLATING wikipedia guidelines... there was nothing personal there.. moreover i don't have much time for personal attacks.. Happy editing.. cheers .. and remember it is YOUR responsibility to get consensus on talk pages BEFORE you add any content :-) -- Adamstraw99 (talk) 07:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamstraw99 You amaze all of us!! you don’t have time for personal attacks!! Wow!! you are outright rude and uncultured – your text and responses reflect your upbringing and intolerance and you say my/our responses are personal attacks!!

We all thought that since we pointed out that you are outright rude in your comments - you would reflect and have the grace to Apologise for your outright rude comments and unacceptable tenor.

As far as not having time my dear friend you seen to have all the time in the world to come back to our well research data and historical photographs and without engaging with us on the “talk page” - unilaterally make changes instead of appreciating the fact that some people are contributing to the wiki pages -spending time researching looking for photographs – reading newspaper articles reported by independent news agencies and reflecting the same on the wiki pages( free of cost- labour of love).

Please calm down & stop being perverse as far as our research goes – engage with us on the talk page BEFORE making any changes.

Hope some senior editor of the wiki pages notices the tenor & outright rude attitude you have been reflecting on the “talk pages”.

ThanksSureshpandey (talk) 12:27, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ Sureshpandey, your behavior doesn't reflect that you even understand the importance of talk pages. you never bothered to respond to talk pages for weeks now.. and nobody has any problem with whatever "research" you are doing... we are only concerned about violation of wikipedia policies which you are doing shamelessly (probably for money).. that's it .. if you abide by the guidelines nobody is going to remove your content.. by the way, apart from admin block and warnings, i can see image copyright warnings on your "talk page"... have you responded to them yet? (just asking because somehow you seems to be mentioning "talk page" in your comments a lot...May i also know why you did not bother to respond to the talk pages issues raised by me in all pant articles for several months?.. also , maybe i am writing this fourth time -->> it is your responsibility to get consensus on talk pages BEFORE ADDING CONTENT.. not mine...thanks

और हाँ पांडेजी, सबसे जरूरी बात जो आपको मैं पहले भी बता चूका हूँ वो ये है की किसी व्यक्ति के ऑफिस में काम करते हुए उनके विकिपीडिया आर्टिकल में काम करना सीधा सीधा विकिपीडिया पालिसी का उल्लंघन है.. आपको पचास बार पहले भी बताया एक बार और बताता हूँ .. अभी तक नहीं पढ़ा हो तो ये पढ़ना और समझना -->>WP:CONFLICT -- ..इन गाइडलाइन्स के हिसाब से आप पे डिस्क्लोज(WP:PAYDISCLOSE) किये बिना पंत फैमिली आर्टिकल्स में कुछ ऐड कर ही नहीं सकते -->> WP:PAYDISCLOSE .. once you disclose pay and follow these guidelines , you will have less chances of being blocked again...and UNLESS YOU PAYDISCLOSE AS PER WP:CONFLICT AND DECLARE IN YOUR USERPAGE THAT YOU ARE EDITING WIKIPEDIA FOR MONEY, I AM NOT GOING TO RESPOND YOU ANYMORE.. YOU ARE NOT WORTH MY TIME thank you --Adamstraw99 (talk) 13:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamstraw99

Oh dear!!

Will a Senior editor request you not to get “personal ”. Don’t you ever learn my dear friend!!

Your arrogance is reflected in your writing and text and comments.

Learn to appreciate “labour of love” and research which is being appreciated worldwide.

You as always have a tendency not to respond to my/our questions and with a play of worlds –you try and turn the tables .. Obviously your Job as a junior editor is for “money ” so in your utter frustration – you claim that the seven of us are connected to historic research for “money “- what a comment, my dear friend – we appreciate the Fact that you have a job (for money) and you go on and as in a perverse manner attaching and deleting our research and photographs.

Has any “reader” on wiki pages or any person who has “viewed” the content or photographs we contributed towards- objected to the content we have researched or made a comment on any of the photographs we have contributed towards . The answer is “No” - “Nobody has “ – in fact readers have thanked us and have sent emails appreciating our labour of love- you may not understand that sentiment.

We have gone through books , Newspaper articles, material stored in libraries and have approximately 12 to 13,000 pages to support our research – Would you forward us the email of your Sr. Editor who may like to go through they 13,000-14,000 pages pertaining to the research?

Or could you forward us a postal address where we could DHL the 13,000 pages for your sr. editors to go through and compare it with the text we have compressed for the wiki pages? Now hopefully you will realise that compressing content from 13-14000 pages into 10-12 wiki pages must have been a difficult task. So my dear friend do not change the content or play around with the historical photographs in the future and try and be humble – arrogance never pays in life.

Please forward us the wiki Sr. editor’s postal Address for us to DHL Our material.

Thanks

Sureshpandey (talk) 11:14, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ Sureshpandey, let me call a senior editor into this..... Sir @ utcursch, this guy is still hell bent on pushing his POV and original research into the pant family articles... now he is asking me to provide postal addresses of other editors... I give up... can you please handle this? thanks.. Adamstraw99 (talk) 13:33, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

45 files on Wikimedia Commons needs permission from the copyright holder

Hello, since I think this is your home wiki, I am notifying you that the 45 files you uploaded on Commons needs permission from the copyright holder (not you), because those photos are obviously not your own work. Scanning a photo doesn't mean it is your own work. Here is the list of the files needing permission:

Please ask the copyright holder to send an email to the OTRS. By sending an email to the OTRS, the copyright holder irrevocably agree to release their files under a free license (like CC-BY-SA-4.0). Yours sincerely, Pokéfan95 (talk) 08:30, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sureshpandey. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sureshpandey. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]