Wikipedia is not a web host for holding personal web pages unrelated to work on building the encyclopaedia. You are, of course, very welcome to start making contributions to the encyclopaedia, in line with Wikipedia policies and guidelines if you are interested in doing so, but if your only interest is in writing a personal web page, then there are many web sites which provide that sort of service, but Wikipedia is not one of them.JBW (talk) 11:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use your sandbox instead, as someone could see your edit before you revert it. Alcatel 144895534 (talk) 17:34, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm DaxServer. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Bajrang Dal 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. — DaxServer (talk to me) 08:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. At least one of your edits on the page Sudhir Chaudhary (journalist), while it may have been in good faith, was difficult to distinguish from vandalism. To help other editors understand the reason for the changes, you can use an edit summary for your contributions. You can also take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. >>> Extorc.talk(); 16:06, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Extorc I'd just added facts, which was fabricated by the Ecosystem of Left-Liberal-Islamic-Christian! Dibyayoti176255 (talk) 16:13, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your facts need to be supported by WP:RS>>> Extorc.talk(); 16:15, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Zee News. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 16:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I am user AnDob24. I wanted to let you know that I have reverted (parts of) your recent edits on the page Krsna as they have a number of issues. Although I would like to appreciate some of the info. you added to the page, I would also like to address these issues. The edits you made (especially in the notes section) are not concise, unreliable (your analysis/understanding), unnecessary (Information on older songs, linking an artist's page more than once), unconstructive and not from a neutral point at times. I see you have a history of publishing such edits. I kindly suggest discussing before making huge edits as it only wastes your time in the process. As for the other smaller issues, you can talk to me.
--AnDob24 (talk) 17:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Vyanjan was inspired from Papoose's Alphabetic Slaughterhouse, & Beyond The Matrix was released on Spotify on 2022, with a little bit of remix! Hope you cognise the matter! Dibyayoti176255 (talk) 17:26, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I highly suggest checking out the Wikipedia pages of other Indian rappers. If you do that, you'll understand why there is no need to add this information. Both are fairly old tracks now & have no overall significance to the artist at the time (Although Vyanjan is surely an important track, it's background info is not really required in a Wiki page). Remember, a Wikipedia page should be concise, professional and only contain relevant content. As a matter of fact, I have been trying to filter the "notes" section and removing matter from it to make it more appropriate for a Wiki page. I hope you got it!
--AnDob24 (talk) 18:02, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dibyayoti176255! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Somnath temple several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Somnath temple, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 17:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Geniac. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Angela Krislinzki, 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. Thank you. Geniac (talk) 12:52, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can give you references, just add to the added info., as I don't know how to add citations! Just revert your undoing & add these Links to the Citations:
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
@162 etc. Just revert it! Okay, I won't add the links, but at least you should retain the info. Dibyayoti176255 (talk) 08:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:PROVEIT, "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material." I've reverted the addition because you have not provided any published sources that demonstrate this remix's notability. Unless such sources are cited, then it shouldn't be in the article. I don't want to start an WP:EDITWAR, so let's end the cycle here, please. Find some reliable sources, and then start a thread at Talk:Tokyo Drift (Fast & Furious) and Talk:Window Shopper. 162 etc. (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That section at KRSNA (rapper) is also unreferenced. And note that Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source, WP:NOTSOURCE. 162 etc. (talk) 15:33, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, just wanted to let you know that you broke the image link on this article. I also see that you changed several english words while changing the transliteration of the indic words. Please refrain from this. I am fixing both of these issues. AlexandraAVX (talk) 13:54, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. You are also edit warring. Wikipedia avoids terms like "freedom fighter" and "terrorist" because they are non-neutral political terms and often do not reflect an accurate historical view. If you think there is a good reason to use the term in this article, please explain why on the article's talk page and do not revert again. Thank you.Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at David Irving. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 17:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit to Mein Kampf 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) 02:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can You Please Elaborate Where & How I Violated Copyright Laws In My Recent Edit On Mein Kampf... BTW, According To Me, I Actually Stated The Another Aspect Of Massive Popularity Of Mein Kampf By Adolf Hitler In India, By Citing The Source...Dibyayoti176255 (talk) 02:32, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The content you added to Mein Kampf was copied from another website, and thus was a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia. Please don't copy from your sources. Everything you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words. — Diannaa (talk) 02:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, Can You Advise Me How To Put Up Information Without Copying...? Dibyayoti176255 (talk) 02:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material (short properly attributed quotations are allowed, but cannot be used as a substitute for writing your own content). One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase, and don't try to include every single detail. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. It also helps to have more than one source to draw from. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa (talk) 02:47, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Hindutva, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 13:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Kautilya,
I Actually Just Rectified The Narrative & Removed Unnecessary Double Quotes, As Well As Added Links... Dibyayoti176255 (talk) 13:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dibyayoti176255! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Hindutva several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Hindutva, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 14:26, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Hindutva 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. Very misleading, looks as though your edit summary was meant to get editors to ignore it.Doug Wellertalk 14:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[1] Please revert yourself. Your edit summary said "elaborating" - if by that you mean making up a quotation, we don't allow that. Please do this before editing again. Thanks Doug Wellertalk 15:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding "an important word" should never be marked as minor[edit]
You have been blocked for a month for persistently disruptive and deficient editing, please see all the warnings above. 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 ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 19:23, 26 March 2024 (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).
Just Because I Made Certain Non-Constructive/Disruptive Edits Doesn't Imply That I Do It All The Time... Most Of The Time, I Just Simply Add Links, Correct The Punctuation Marks, Etc... From Time To Time, I Was Much Active Only For This Month Of March 2024... As Of Deficient Editings, I Promise To Improve More, As I'm A Beginner In Editing Wiki Pages & Articles. Dibyayoti176255 (talk) 02:37, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Decline reason:
Please do not capitalize the first letter of every word; it makes your text hard to read. No one has said you were disruptive all the time, but your disruption is persistent enough that we needed to take action to prevent it. We need you to do more than just say you will improve, please tell what steps you will take to improve. 331dot (talk) 07:46, 27 March 2024 (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.
I've fixed your unblock request by removing the unhelpful nowiki templates so that it'll call an uninvolved admin here. I haven't changed it in any other way. Bishonen | tålk 03:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Internet censorship in Iran—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. Serols (talk) 11:39, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Internet censorship in Iran. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Serols (talk) 17:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing.
Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. At least one of your edits on the page Sudhir Chaudhary (journalist), while it may have been in good faith, was difficult to distinguish from vandalism. To help other editors understand the reason for the changes, you can use an edit summary for your contributions. You can also take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. >>> Extorc.talk(); 16:06, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Your edit to Mein Kampf 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) 02:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
