User talk:Jattnijj

http://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/dhttp://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/dasam-granth-its-historysam-granth-its-historyttp://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/dasam-granth-its-history{unblock reviewed| reason= Guys Please don't misunderstand me but this article and the other one are the incorrect they are at best propaganda And I don't know how to use wiki or the conventions Jattnijj (talk)|decline=You are blocked for edit warring; you'll need to address that in your unblock request. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 18:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)}} I would decline your request if I were an admin (I'm not), but still, I am not convinced by 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[reply]

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. Insulam Simia (talk) 17:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you knowledgeable about Sikhism?

No, but that's nothing to do with your unblock request (I just saw your unblock request on recent changes). And if you don't understand Wikipedia, then:

Hello, Jattnijj! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Insulam Simia (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

There ya' go. Insulam Simia (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also provided references - they were deleted !!!! http://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/dasam-granth-its-history http://sikhspectrum.com/2006/02/misrepresenting-sikhism-as-vedantic-philosophy/

Where were the personal attacks? Im sure your friends are capable enough to present their arguments themselves.....

Recent edits to Sarbloh Granth

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to the Sarbloh Granth article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you! AsceticRosé 10:55, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Hello, I'm Flyer22. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Sarbloh Granth, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Flyer22 (talk) 11:15, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Dasam Granth, 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. Dawnseeker2000 16:05, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sarbloh Granth may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Sikh scriptures}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:07, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Dasam Granth may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

] containing texts unlikely to be associated with the tenth [[Sikh guru]], [[Guru Gobind Singh]].<ref name=
| title = The Encyclopaedia Of Indian Literature (Volume One (A To Devo), Volume 1

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/dasam-granth-its-history== Your edits == Hello, please do not edit or add any further content to the articles without first following some of the links provided in the messages above. You may not add your personal opinions to the encyclopedia's articles. Thank you, Dawnseeker2000 16:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most of article is opimiom or propaganda, do you know anything about sikhism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jattnijj (talk • contribs)

Adding more opinion is not OK. Please do not continue to add unsourced material. If you are unsure how to add a reference, please view this tutorial. Thanks again, Dawnseeker2000 16:41, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:Razorflame with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Razor flame 16:41, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User talk:Dawnseeker2000. Razor flame 16:43, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:05, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Jat people, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Sitush (talk) 12:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sarbloh Granth with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 12:48, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Jat people with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 13:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Dasam Granth. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Sitush (talk) 13:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove the references

http://sikhspectrum.com/2006/02/misrepresenting-sikhism-as-vedantic-philosophy/

http://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/dasam-granth-its-history

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Jat people. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Sudo Ghost 19:45, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. - Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:55, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jat people may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

|caption=<small>Chaudhary [[Charan Singh]], the first kisan [Prime Minister of India]], accompanied by his wife, on his way to address the nation at the [[Red Fort]], [[Delhi]],

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:15, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

Despite several previous blocks, you are continuing to edit war, lob personal attacks at other users, and generally not edit according to our rules. The next time you break our editing policies, you will be blocked again, and for much longer than your previous blocks (as in, a month or more). It's time for you to slow down, learn about some of our policies (links have been provided to you above), actually check articles and references before removing verified information, and engaging in discussion rather than edit warring when your edits are disputed. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:58, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ the sources used are not balanced or reflective of the different views - if you have an argument please present it, but you should also know something about the subject matter otherwise you cannot discriminate between misrepresentation, mistake and coherent arguments. Jattnijj (talk) 16:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am unsure if your recent changes to Sarbloh Granth play a role in the aforementioned edit war, but you incorrectly attempted to add references. See WP:REFBEGIN on how to add references, and WP:RELY on how to determine if they constitute as reliable sources. Thanks! — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And I need to give you the other following formal warning:

The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:General sanctions/South Asian social groups.

Qwyrxian (talk) 05:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jat people, you may be blocked from editing. You cannot make trivial edits for the purposes of soapboxing in edit summaries. That is vandalism. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:30, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

lol, did you never hear of freedom of speech ! The whole article is unbalanced and incongruous! Have you even been to India ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jattnijj (talk • contribs) 17:57, 14 August 2013‎

No, I never had the opportunity. My cameras, however, and not just once, stole my money, hopped on air planes bound for Delhi and helped themselves to a few sights: File:Bhagirathi alaknanda ganges devprayag2008.jpg, File:GroupFromNorthEastIndiaAtTaj.jpg, File:MKGandhi assassination spot.jpg, and File:JatsAroundDelhi1868.jpg, to name a few, which they managed to upload on Wikipedia in my name. They're still AWOL in India. The last picture makes me suspect they might be among the Jat people. Perhaps with your intimate knowledge of the country and the people, you could locate them for me. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:26, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop

Please stop this disruptive editing. You are welcome to discuss your concerns regarding the Jat people article at Talk:Jat people but not by making silly edits in order to do so via edit summary. If your concerns are legitimate then, believe me, you will find people are willing to listen to you; however, if you carry on in your current manner then you are going to be blocked from contributing and that will mean you become unable to voice those concerns. Basically, your present behaviour is self-defeating. - Sitush (talk) 20:43, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Requesting Sanctions enforcement. Thank you. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:51, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jattnijj, after many warnings, the choice is clear. You can continue with these edits, insisting you're right and the community view is wrong or you can give up this tenacious and obsessive pursuit of being "right" and learn how to collaborate with others and stay on Wikipedia and contribute to creating great articles. Wikipedia Admins will follow through on their warnings so it's entirely up to you whether you persist and get blocked or change, adapt and help us with all of the work that needs to be done here. It's up to you. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 01:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]