General note: Unconstructive editing on Inter-Services Intelligence activities in India. (TW) |
→WP:ARBIPA: new section Tag: contentious topics alert |
||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, I'm [[User:Faizan|Faizan]]. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of [[Special:Contributions/VediKboy|your recent contributions]] to [[:Inter-Services Intelligence activities in India]] because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[WP:sandbox|sandbox]]. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User_talk:Faizan|my talk page]]. Thanks!<!-- Template:uw-vandalism1 --> <span style="border:2px solid #000;background:#000">[[User:Faizan|<span style="color:#fff;">Fai</span>]][[User Talk:Faizan|<span style="color:#0f0">zan</span>]]</span> 09:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC) |
[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, I'm [[User:Faizan|Faizan]]. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of [[Special:Contributions/VediKboy|your recent contributions]] to [[:Inter-Services Intelligence activities in India]] because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[WP:sandbox|sandbox]]. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User_talk:Faizan|my talk page]]. Thanks!<!-- Template:uw-vandalism1 --> <span style="border:2px solid #000;background:#000">[[User:Faizan|<span style="color:#fff;">Fai</span>]][[User Talk:Faizan|<span style="color:#0f0">zan</span>]]</span> 09:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC) |
||
== [[WP:ARBIPA]] == |
|||
{{Ivm|2='''Please carefully read this information:''' |
|||
The Arbitration Committee has authorised [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions]] to be used for pages regarding [[India]], [[Pakistan]], and [[Afghanistan]], a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan|here]]. |
|||
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[WP:INVOLVED|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behavior]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|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. |
|||
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. |
|||
}}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> |
Revision as of 10:17, 15 December 2014
July 2012
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ≫TheStrike Σagle≪ 12:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
August 2013
Please do not add or change content, as you did to Shiv Sena, 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. NeilN talk to me 20:46, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
One reference is not enough and it's not important enough to be in the lead. --NeilN talk to me 13:09, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
- we would need independent sources for this statement, not his own blog. Even then, it certainly has no place in the lead and almost certainly no place in the article. Name-calling is common but unless you can show that these particular examples are widely recognised, they are not notable. - Sitush (talk) 13:12, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
September 2013
Your recent editing history at Digvijaya Singh shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.
To avoid being blocked, 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. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Sitush (talk) 13:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
July 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of political catchphrases may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- *Abki Baar,Modi Sarkar - The BJP 2014 <ref>[http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-05-15/news/49873496_1_narendra-modi-ki-baar-modi-
- att det är häftigt att betala skatt. För mig är skatt det finaste uttrycket för vad politik är." (If you're a Social Democrat, you think it's cool to pay taxes. To me, taxes are the most beautiful
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:18, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Deleting instead of moving
If you need to move content from one section to another do so yourself, or make an edit request if you do not know how to.. but do not delete content or you will be blocked from editing. --lTopGunl (talk) 07:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- The sources do not call it a conspiracy theory.. first one doesn't talk about theories at all, the second one only says media is tapped into conspiracy theories. This one is however an affidavit (the second source also seems to hold a POV as it calls the person 'the new best friend of Pakistan'... a POV source maybe fine, but we've to use it here neutrally). Use the article's talkpage before making any further reverts. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
December 2014
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. lTopGunl (talk) 16:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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 that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
- 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. lTopGunl (talk) 16:14, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article. lTopGunl (talk) 07:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Faizan. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Inter-Services Intelligence activities in India because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Faizan 09:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
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.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.