User talk:Themodifie7

October 2022

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Special 26 has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. ButterCashier (talk) 12:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

@ButterCashier ok thanks. Themodifie7 (talk) 12:33, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Akshay Kumar 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. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 12:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@Krimuk2.0 same to you.. That information was already added. why u are deleting. Themodifie7 (talk) 12:24, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. You need to STOP reverting again and again and again when your edits are reverted. Follow WP:BRD - you made a bold edit, but it was reverted, it's time for you to start discussing the change on the article talk page. Ravensfire (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

This [1] is not a good sign. It's the list of all contributions you have made to article talk pages. As of right now, that number is zero. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing environment where you must work with other editors and seek WP:CONSENSUS when there are differences. You really need to read and follow the WP:BRD process. Ravensfire (talk) 18:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Akshay Kumar

added links pointing to BSF and Sparx

Amrish Puri

added a link pointing to Mainstream

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Akshay Kumar

Hi there!

Please remember, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a fansite, and not a film magazine. The language and terminology should be more formal, and not every film he appeared in should appear in the introduction. For example, Sapoot - why should it even be there being a massive flop? Also, I understand he has commercial achievements, which is good for him, but we don't have to squeeze it all into the introduction. It's enough that films did well. Also, the sentence, "Forbes included Kumar in the list of highest-paid celebrities in the world from 2015 to 2018, and he was the only Indian to be on the list in the next two years." is very good, why change it? Very short and concise, and the years are clearly specified. Thanks you. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:55, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh you also need to remember, you are not the owner of wikipedia. what's the matter of making short and i know what should be there in introduction. Themodifie7 (talk) 19:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Themodifie7: No one is the owner. But a) Wikipedia policy is the owner; b) you clearly seem to not completely know what should and what shouldn't be there based on your edits; and c) please be polite because I definitely was. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:27, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh again you removed what i have edited few minutes ago. what's the problem with that. Add that text again. otherwise I will do it. Wikipedia policy doesn't have words limit and my edit was relevant. OK I am being polite. Themodifie7 (talk) 19:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Themodifie7: My friend, I explained my edit. This is the same list! See the summary here. The same list where he appeared for five years. And yes, there is word limit on leads. Read WP:LEAD and WP:UNDUE. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:43, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Themodifie7: Actually, I'm not sure if that's what you meant, but there's a list for celebrities and another one for actors. Mentioned it. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:04, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh did you removed the articles of "Kumar is the first Indian film actor, whose films' domestic net lifetime collections crossed ₹20 billion (US$341.31 million) by 2013, and ₹30 billion (US$446.46 million) by 2016" from Introduction to In the media. Undo it please, take it back anywhere in introduction without removing anything else. Themodifie7 (talk) 20:19, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Themodifie7: I moved it to the text in the article (section: In the media; maybe should be moved to the career section). We do not include such details or numbers in the lead. It's too much - the lead is a summary, not a list of random commercial achievments. If you insist, you can address it on the talk page, but I'm sure its inclusion will not be supported. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh before somebody removed it, it was already there since long time. Themodifie7 (talk) 20:32, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Themodifie7: It has actually been removed and restored several times. But it doesn't mean anything. Wikipedia policy is very clear on the purpose of leads. I honestly can't understand why you would insist on it, it's so random and people can hardly understand what it means. Saying he's successful and one of the world's (!) highest-paid actors is more than enough. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:34, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh well, ok Themodifie7 (talk) 20:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Themodifie7: Welcome to Wikipedia. Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:48, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Dear friend, please revert your last two edits, there is consensus that your edits have been unconstroctive and contentious and you should discuss before re-adding them. If reported now, you will be blocked from editing. It's not good for you, so please be smart and revert yourself. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:33, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh You know, Those lines were already there. That presents his success in box office and all that with sources. linking those sources with Padma Shri doesn't justify Kumar's success. You are senior editor than me and you had edited them, friend. You re edit that again but represent his success about box office wise and Forbes too. Themodifie7 (talk) 12:43, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

But people disagree with you, respect it and take it to the talk page and discuss. Him being one of the most successful actors is nonsense - the intro already says he is among the highest-paid actors in the world (!!!). The word acclaim is also quite redundant - see WP:PUFFERY. I highly recommend that you revert yourself. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh why don't you see in Salman Khan's page, It is also there.!!! and word acclaim was edited by you few days ago. Themodifie7 (talk) 12:53, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@Themodifie7: I was convinced by the other editor that acclaim is too much. Salman Khan is a bad example because that page is badly written, and also see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS - this isn't a good point to make. Akshay Kumar's achievements speak for themselves. I'm trying to help you and you are just rejecting it. Too bad because this isn't gonna stay there anyway, and it's better be you who removes it. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh If Salman's page is badly written then others editors don't make them well. Kumar's achivement speaks for themselves? what is this.? if there is many sources that he is commercially successful actor then why not to add a single half line in intro. this is so stupid excuse friend. Let happen to me whatever happens. Themodifie7 (talk) 13:04, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

If there's a problem with Salman's page, go and fix it. Since there is consensus on the talk page, the version agreen upon has been restored. Please note, if you revert again, you will be vilating WP:3RR, so please have patience and if you think something is too important to be left out, use the talk page to convince those who disagree with you. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:39, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh what difference it will make if Akshay has also won padmashri and many other characters actors has also won padmashri. do they also as much successful as Akshay?? That line should be there at introduction. Themodifie7 (talk) 13:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

You are edit warring. Revert yourself and have respect. And no, it's the Padma Shri, it's the fact he's the highest-paid Indian actor. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@Shshshsh go and edit other actors page. i will revert of myself. i respect you a lot my friend. Themodifie7 (talk) 14:01, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Partial block from Akshay Kumar

You have been blocked from editing Akshay Kumar for a period of one week for disruptive editing. Specifically, edit warring and promotional tone. Note that you can still edit the article talk page (here) to raise any suggestions or concerns, including making edit requests. Thanks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  El_C 14:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@El C {{unblock|reason=I have been edited though sources but one user made it change again and again due to personal jealous with Kumar. which wasn't justifying Akshay Kumar's status. I also reverted that edit again and again. Unblock me Themodifie7 (talk) 15:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

No. I'm sorry to be harsh, but that reasoning sounds nonsensical. El_C 15:37, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@El C Kumar has been undoubtedly one of the most commercially successful actors of Hindi cinema. Don't you agree ? He has most number of hits, he has most number of 100cr films etcetera etcetera. why not you add this with that sources. Your guys reason for removing that line is nonsensical and unreasonable. Themodifie7 (talk) 15:47, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree that it's true, but that doesn't diminish from your presentation of it being promotional in tone. And while it might be nonsensical to you, we have rules in place that the community has agreed upon, in this instance generally pertaining to Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Check out, for example, how Tom Cruise success is presented in the opening of his bio. As for your claim of personal jealousy, etc., sorry, but that sounds like something you made up. El_C 15:54, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

• As your disruption has extended outside of a single article, I've modified the block site-wide. You're making disruptive, pointy edits and edit warring across multiple article. Please take the time to read through the advice, policies and guidelines that have been provided to you on this page.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:01, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for disruption and edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:01, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@El C: If you think that 1 week is excessive now that the block is site wide, please feel free to modify it.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:01, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@Ponyo: sorry for the belated reply. No objection. I only looked at that one page in isolation, so I'll leave the matter to you. El_C 15:43, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

@El C Unblock me, i will not violet any rules further. Themodifie7 (talk) 05:12, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Akshay Kumar, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages BSF and Sparx.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pankaj Tripathi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Gopalganj, Omkara and Agneepath.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 (new section)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hera Pheri (film series). This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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 and 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. Follow WP:BRD. If you continue to add your fan-made logo, calling it the "official logo" for the series, I will take this to the WP:EWN and ask you be blocked for edit-warring. Your edit has been challenged, you need to start a discussion on the article talk page. Read WP:DR. Ravensfire (talk) 13:03, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rohit Shetty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Breakthrough.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

November 2022

Hello, I'm Ravensfire. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Bhagam Bhag, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The "cult status" line is not supported by the article at all. The "mostly positive" summary of critical reviews is at best a misread of what's in the article, at worse a deliberate error intended to push a POV of the film. Lead sections MUST be an accurate summary of what's in the article. Ravensfire (talk) 18:20, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Sid95Q. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Ajnabee (2001 film) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Please check MOS:FILM Sid95Q (talk) 10:35, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

@Sid95Q well, i hadn't added anything without sources. why u are removing that all time I don't know. if it doesn't appear you should make it constructive. i am trying to make it again. 😃 Themodifie7 (talk) 16:37, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Please read WP:PUFF and MOS:LEAD. Sid95Q (talk) 19:15, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Please stop adding that all films / series have been "critically successful". Not all film articles support that, so you cannot add it in the series article. Ravensfire (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Udit Narayan, you may be blocked from editing. - Arjayay (talk) 12:05, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rajkumar Hirani, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages PK, FTII and Dangal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Editing disputes

Editing disputes will happen on articles, and just reverting back to your preferred version is not helpful and goes against Wikipedia's principles. The ideal approach is called WP:BRD - you Boldly make a change, but when an editor Reverts your material, you start a Discussion on the article talk page. I'm glad to talk there, and probably would be good to also mention at the WP:ICTF page to bring in a broader range of views. The Dispute Resolution page also has good tips on handling edit disputes. Ravensfire (talk) 17:53, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ravensfire Okay, Hirani's intro page requires the lines i have added and i have added sources a lot. His commercial performance should be there Themodifie7 (talk) 17:58, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Minor edits

Please only use the minor edit checkbox when it's a truly minor edit - meaning a spelling fix, capitalization or italics usage, a few words added, fixing a layout error or vandalism - the WP:MINOR has more help on what Wikipedia considers a minor edit. Edits like these are not minor edits - [2], [3], [4], [5]. Please respect the Wikipedia community consensus for using minor edit. Ravensfire (talk) 14:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

The Kashmir files

Hi, excuse my tardiness in writing to you, but I am going to give you a word to the wise, nonetheless, because further infractions of page specific restrictions may not go unactioned. I reverted your contentious deletions from the lead of the foregoing page earlier today for a cavalier nonobservance of the page specific notice on the page, which required a prior discourse and a talk page consensus for alterations to its lead.[6] Your deletions appeared inexplicable and contentious. The lead had been worked on by collaborating editors who went through the travails of soliciting consensus on its language. Your reckless changes infringed on that consensus. So pray tread carefully in contentious topics and use the talk pages to discuss controversial changes. Even without page restrictions in effect, you could never go wrong by exercising good, old common courtesy of seeking editorial participation for content related improvements on the talk page. MBlaze Lightning (talk) 17:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

March 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Mahabharata, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Kautilya3. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Audrey Truschke seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 23:30, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

— DaxServer (t · m · c) 14:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Rohit Shetty filmography for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rohit Shetty filmography is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rohit Shetty filmography until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Bearcat (talk) 20:18, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Pinged

I left a ping on Talk:Allahabad Kumbh Mela wondering why you suddenly moved the page without warning. Please respond in the talk page. Thanks! HeartCat1^💬_📝 04:53, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Page moves, PLEASE STOP!

Hello, Themodifie7,

Please stop with all of the unnecessary page moves. You have created dozens of unnecessary page redirects. It looks like sometimes you moved an article to a different title and then decided to move it back to the original title! This is the definition of disruptive editing and could result in a loss of editing previleges. Please do not take page moves so casually, you should discuss moving an article first on the article talk page and NEVER move it multiple times. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:34, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

my apologies... Themodifie7 (talk) 05:57, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Allahabad Kumbh Mela‎ a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 07:28, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

April 2023

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Allahabad Kumbh Mela. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. – robertsky (talk) 08:28, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Prayagraaj Kumbh Mela

A tag has been placed on Prayagraaj Kumbh Mela requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 10:05, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

May 2023

The prose in the lead of Varanasi and the choice of infobox pictures form a longstanding consensus on that page. You are welcome to start a new thread on Talk:Varanasi, but you cannot add sentence fragments here and there or shuffle sentences around and thereby degrade the prose. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler i have replied you there. :) Themodifie7 (talk) 07:53, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

— DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 10:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anupam Kher, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khel.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

I have already reminded you in May. I will do so once again: The prose in the lead of Varanasi and the choice of infobox pictures form a longstanding consensus on that page. You are welcome to start a new thread on Talk:Varanasi, but you cannot add sentence fragments here and there or shuffle sentences around and thereby degrade the prose, especially not once they have been challenged.

Please read WP:BRD and WP:ONUS. They constitute Wikipedia policy. An administrator has posted there. Posting meaningless comments that I do not know anything about Varanasi, does not help. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:57, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler ok do whatever you want afterall you are very senior can do anything Themodifie7 (talk) 03:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler ok do whatever you want afterall you are very senior can do anything Themodifie7 (talk) 03:02, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Again @Themodifie7: Please read the administrator's words below to @DaDeadzombie: on Talk:Varanasi: "as the person seeking to make changes to long-standing content, it is your responsibility to obtain consensus for the change, via talk page discussion or an RFC. You may not repeatedly revert to your preferred version once it's been challenged."

Please self-revert your last edit on Varanasi. That is not my task. I don't engage in WP:Edit Warring Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

we already have our discussions open in Varanasi page talkpage. where not only @Fowler&fowler & @Themodifie7 but others also putting their views.

So we can continue our discussions on the Varanasi city talkpage. And also as majority in the talkpage are in support of the new changes please requesting you @Fowler&fowler to not revert & divert the discussions before conclusions. DaDeadzombie (talk) 09:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@DaDeadzombie exactly, what's the matter of any discussion if even pointing something with facts aren't under process. Themodifie7 (talk) 14:57, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Ravensfire. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gadar 2, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. This edit is entirely unsupported by the given source. Ravensfire (talk) 03:49, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

@Ravensfire I have added sources for everything. kindly check Themodifie7 (talk) 03:51, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Unblock

{{Unblock|Reason=I don't know why I have been blocked, no warning at all. And that too for infinity??}} Themodifie7 (talk) 13:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

October 2023

Your edit to Chandrayaan-3 has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 16:15, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

Hi Themodifie7! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Oldboy (2003 film) that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Stop marking nearly all of your edits as minor. They are not. Read WP:MINOR and please follow it going forward. It's somewhat disruptive when you falsely claim edits to be minor when they are not. Ravensfire (talk) 02:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Formally or formerly - which is right depends on what you are trying to say.

• The word "formally" means (1) in accordance with convention or etiquette, or (2) officially.
• There is a different word "formerly" that means "in the past" or "in earlier times."

You might want to review your recent edit to the article on Allahabad.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

MS Dhoni

Hi Themodifie7! I have found that you have been adding/removing the article lead of MS Dhoni without any rationale. If you want to play around, please do it in the sandbox. Refer to WP:LEAD, as it is a common and good practice not to have referencees in the lead and have them incorporated in the article as the lead is a summary of the article itself. If you have any concerns, you are requested to raise it in the talk page.Magentic Manifestations (talk) 04:02, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

You deleted things without talk page. I reverted it. You deleted so many things from other headers also. As I reverted pnly lead. And all the leads are accurate and have sources. Themodifie7 (talk) 04:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Stop reverting the changes and start a discussion. Do not get into edit warring. Read the WP:LEAD before making any further changes.Magentic Manifestations (talk) 04:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. I have given enough warnings on your disruptive behavior. You have made three reverts already without any discussion. Any further reverts have to be reported for WP:3RR.Magentic Manifestations (talk) 04:26, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Adding, I have clearly specified to read through WP:LEAD and it is a common and good practice not to have repeated references in the lead as the lead summarizes the article. If the same has been sourced in the article, then it is not required to add references in the lead. Not sure, why you are hell-bent on adding duplicate references, pushing your POV and contradicting, tinkering with your own edits. In my opinion, the current version adequately summarizes the article and it is as per WP:NPOV. Regarding the content, if there are any specific points you have concerns, you can raise it and discuss in the talk page.Magentic Manifestations (talk) 04:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

January 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to History of India, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Jay Shah, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Themodifie7. Thank you. Vanamonde93 (talk) 02:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Repeated grammatical errors

Stop adding the same grammatical errors to articles, even when you have been reverted, as you have done here. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

January 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Please see [7].

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bishonen | tålk 10:11, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Unblock me

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Themodifie7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I am blocked for Infinity time without any warning, kindly unblock me and will never voilet any rules.Themodifie7 (talk) 07:07, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Far too vague to consider unblock. Be specific about what you'll do right. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:55, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

unblocking

{{unblock|1= I am blocked for Infinity time without any warning, kindly unblock me and will never voilet any rules}} Themodifie7 (talk) 07:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

You already have an open request, which is rubbish. Please adjust it accordingly. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:44, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

In any case, I see multiple warnings. Doug Weller talk 08:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Indeed I see more than 30 warnings on this talk page alone, not to mention two previous blocks. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93 Before blocking, i needed an warning so that i could revert my edit. Kindly unblock me. Will not violet again Themodifie7 (talk) 07:16, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Themodifie7. You have been both partially and fully-blocked before, so you knew about being blocked - see #Partial block from Akshay Kumar. Your block from editing expired on 21 October 2022. Your talk page shows 1 warning on 28 October 2022, 4 warnings in November 2022, 2 more in December 2022, 1 in February 2023, 3 in March 2023, 3 in April 2023, 1 in May 2023, 3 in August 2023, 1 in October 2023, 5 in December 2023, and 4 in January 2024. So when you wrote I am blocked for Infinity time without any warning in your unblock request, it would have been more accurate to have written "I am blocked for Infinity time with only 28 warnings since my last unblock". If you want to get unblocked, you have to be willing to learn from past mistakes.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:51, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Toddy1 Ok i am still learning the process... Kindly make me unblock. Themodifie7 (talk) 15:38, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Themodifie7: If you are learning the process then do an unblock request where (1) the template works, and (2) your request complies with Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks#Composing your request to be unblocked. Remember admins will check.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

And, by the way, adding "nowiki" markup to a template disables the template. This is also a mistake, that you seen to expect the rest of us to fix for you. But you never learn. Have you ever read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks and Wikipedia:Appealing a block?-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:55, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Toddy1 Please make me unblock. Will not violate the rules now. Themodifie7 (talk) 08:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

There are things that you have to do for yourself, such as: (a) breathing, (b) eating, and (c) completing the unblock template in a way that complies with Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Toddy1 please unblock me. 😔 Themodifie7 (talk) 06:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)