User talk:Mohammed.Khandwala

Mohammed.Khandwala, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Mohammed.Khandwala! 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 Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

Hello, I'm Uranium Site. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Delmal 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. Thanks. Uranium Site (talk) 14:36, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

well i have one references Mohammed.Khandwala (talk) 15:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Mohammed Burhanuddin 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.
Ravensfire (talk) 16:24, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravensfire, will u plz help me to get edit for semi protected acc. as per wiki guidelines, if user acc is 4 days old he can go for semi protected acc. my acc is 4 days old still i m not be able to edit. plz do help Mohammed.Khandwala (talk) 21:08, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ravensfire can i edit the content in Mohammed Burhanuddin which i was reverted. can i edit that??? Mohammed.Khandwala (talk) 00:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

the page of Mohammed Burhanuddin is semi protected so can in edit now?? Mohammed.Khandwala (talk) 00:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed.Khandwala, if you continue to add unsoruced and trivial information, it will continue to be removed. If you continue to try to force it into the article, you can end up blocked from editing - read the linked pages in the warning above. Ravensfire (talk) 02:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

i have add few proper sources but still they r revising u do something Mohammed.Khandwala (talk) 10:39, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed.Khandwala, if you continue, I'll end up taking this to the edit-war noticeboard as you keep trying to force it into the article. The warning above gave you good advice, read and follow it. Ravensfire (talk) 13:12, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok but whenever i will post and upload with proper sources. u plz not try to revise and reterited. i will follow the guidelines as much as i can Mohammed.Khandwala (talk) 13:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since you've missed the point I was trying to make, what you need to do is start a discussion on the article talk page about this. Please DON'T put the material back in the article again. Discuss and seek consensus on adding it and only if that develops, add it to the article. Ravensfire (talk) 13:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok Mohammed.Khandwala (talk) 13:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Mohammed.Khandwala! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Ravensfire (talk) 16:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Hmkwfrance per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hmkwfrance. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. Mz7 (talk) 05:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

plz lift the block Mohammed.Khandwala (talk) 08:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.