User talk:Varunharkut

May 2021

Hello, I'm Gaelan. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Samay Raina—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Gaelan 💬✏️ 07:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Samay Raina. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Samay Raina was changed by Varunharkut (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.87738 on 2021-05-11T07:42:55+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 07:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Samay Raina, you may be blocked from editing. Gaelan 💬✏️ 07:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Samay Raina shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. -- Tamzin (she/they, no pref.) | o toki tawa mi. 00:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you and a number of other users have been in an edit war adding unreferenced information about a living person. I, as an outside editor, have no way of knowing which edits are correct and which aren't, which is why we require sourcing. I have reverted the article to its state of about 20 hours ago. You are welcome to re-add any of your edits if you can source them to reliable source. Please be advised that, as you have made nine reverts to the article in the past 24 hours (where three is the typical maximum), re-adding them without these sources would constitute edit warring, as described above.

Furthermore, please do not warn other editors for vandalism for edits that are made in apparent good faith. Per WP:Vandalism: On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge. Furthermore, if you do encounter actual vandalism in the future, please see Wikipedia:Vandalism § How to respond to vandalism before you warn any more users. Threatening something like being "permanently banned from editing Wiki pages" is an incorrect characterization of our policies. Currently, the person most at-risk of a block here would appear to be you, not the users you warned. -- Tamzin (she/they, no pref.) | o toki tawa mi. 00:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two updates: One, the page has now been locked from editing by new users; however, you are welcome to make edit requests on the talk page. Two, after looking at your past edits, and those of other users, I have rolled the page significantly further back, reverting most of the changes made since April 25th. As with before, though, you are welcome to restore anything that you can back up with a reliable source; or, in this case, you are welcome to post the source to the talk page and request that someone else re-add the content. -- Tamzin (she/they, no pref.) | o toki tawa mi. 01:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Varunharkut, please abide by our guidelines and policies. Blocking is an easy thing to do. And if you make so many edits to one article, and there's a hundred notes on your talk page, it's probably a good idea to stop what you are doing and listen to what others are saying. Drmies (talk) 02:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Varunharkut, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Varunharkut! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GoingBatty (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)