User talk:Giridharmurthy100

May 2016

Hi, Giridharmurthy100, welcome to Wikipedia. Please stop putting unsourced editing requests on Talk:Kapu (caste) and try to take on board what experienced editors tell you about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Don't attack them when they do, as you did here. Discuss civilly. If you have no interest in our policies, as you imply here, you'll probably be happier contributing to a different type of site. Bishonen | talk 17:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC).[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

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.

The above issued because you have just yet again repeated the same pointless edit request. Enough is enough. - Sitush (talk) 02:51, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Patel. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Sundayclose (talk) 16:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing people to do edits on your behalf ([1], [2]) isn't going to do you any favours. As has been explained to you before, you need to get consensus on the article talk page. Furthermore, a news report from 2009 cannot possibly verify a statement relating to 2016 - this was pointless. - Sitush (talk) 11:32, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I should also warn you against spamming about Kapu (caste) at unrelated pages like Talk: Patel. Every article has its own talk page, which is meant for discussing the content of that particular page. Please respect that. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:27, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You have been topic banned for one month from editing Kapu (caste) and all related pages. Please click on the link Topic ban to see what "topic banned" means.

You have been sanctioned for spamming Talk:Kapu (caste) as well as user talkpages with the same edit request, which has already been answered many times. The last straw is your posting the same request on a random article talkpage (Talk:Patel).

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Bishonen | talk 19:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have reverted some of your recent contributions to Talk:Kapu (caste). You are banned from editing pages relating to the Kapu caste for a period of one month and yet continue to swamp people with numerous requests, often poorly-formed, poorly sourced/unsourced and repetitive in nature. A topic ban means what it says - you are banned from the topic to which it refers. Please, please read the links in the above notice. You are going to find yourself indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia if you persist in your present behaviours. - Sitush (talk) 18:55, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

To enforce an arbitration decision you have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. Katie^talk 19:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

July 2016

Your recent edits to Talk:Kapu (caste) could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you.

Don't say things like this. Sitush (talk) 19:30, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Who edited this: Subdivisions Numerous, including Balija, Telaga, Munnuru Kapu

What does numerous mean?

Depending on the context, numerous means a multitude, many, quite a few ... anything along those lines. I made the change here. As the edit summary says, the article mentions far more than just the ones named in the infobox. I'm not even sure that it is worth naming those few in the box because it is arguably giving them undue weight. - Sitush (talk) 19:55, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WIKI ADMIN WATCH THIS BELOW: Who edited this: Subdivisions Numerous, including Balija, Telaga, Munnuru Kapu What does numerous mean?

I want Wiki Admin to watch this person Sitush making ruthless edits by adding derogatory things under subdivisions which give very bad impression to the web page. Also, as listed for Reddy caste in the box with a status column you can add the same to Kapu caste pgae to show who are backward and forward.

How is the addition of "numerous" derogatory? I think you may need to consult a dictionary. - Sitush (talk) 20:03, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is numerous a sub-dvision of Kapu caste page? Can you prove it please?

Giridharmurthy100, if you don't understand an English word on the English Wikipedia, I suggest you look it up, for instance in Wiktionary: numerous. I'm sure you know about online dictionaries. I was hoping you'd use the month you were topic banned from Kapu (caste) to teach yourself a little more about how Wikipedia works by editing other subjects. (For instance, learn to sign your posts like other people do.) But it seems you simply went away for a month, and now you're back with some frankly very poor posts yet again on Talk:Kapu (caste): primitive legal threats (granted, "if not i will call 911 police" is too up in the blue to scare anybody) and childish slurs ("Sitush, you son.."). If you're incapable of having a constructive conversation and of understanding the explanations you're given, you will very soon be indefinitely topic banned from Kapu (caste). Anyway, if Kapu is your only interest on Wikipedia, you'd probably be more usefully happy on a Kapu noticeboard, rather than here. Bishonen | talk 20:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Naidu Rich.pdf

A tag has been placed on File:Naidu Rich.pdf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted content borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

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 removed 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. Sitush (talk) 16:44, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing at Kapu (caste). If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 08:18, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Giridharmurthy100, you were topic banned from Kapu (caste) for one month on 4 June 2016. After first violating the ban and getting blocked for it, you left completely for exactly one month, then started again with the same poor edits to Talk:Kapu (caste). You were warned by me on 12 July,[3] went away again, and then re-started editing Talk:Kapu (caste) on 21 August. This is a very unpromising pattern. You still don't appear to take in what you're told, don't sign your posts, and, most serious of all, have edited nothing else, even though I advised you to edit other articles so as to learn how Wikipedia works. That's the point of a topic ban as compared to a block: that you can edit in other areas. You haven't done that, and have consequently learned nothing. Topic banning you didn't work, and can't be expected to. Therefore, I've blocked you indefinitely. As I said above, since Kapu is your only interest on Wikipedia, and your editing of the article and its talkpage isn't appropriate for an encyclopedia, you'll probably be happier editing a Kapu noticeboard. Bishonen | talk 17:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC). Adding: I've converted the AE block to an ordinary block, because AE blocks aren't allowed to be indefinite. Bishonen | talk 08:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC).[reply]